Would you know a good one?
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 5:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
That's a lot of questions in one post. May I suggest that you hire a
consultant?
Ed
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Blackstone
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 6:30 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
Would you know a good one?
-Original
Should we call you Dave or David?
-Original Message-
From: David, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 6:17 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Tumbleweed
I just got rolled with about nine OOFS.
-Original Message-
From: Neil Hobson
You are going to be introducing a lot of changes by doing this.
Let me give you a piece of advise. Put the Xwall on a separate box.
-Original Message-
From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (pfeffepe) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 7:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:
Mike,
There was a massive thread on here about this subject yesterday. Check it
out.
-Original Message-
From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 8:18 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Encryption packages
Good morning,
Outlook 98. Exchange 5.5
::pats MailFrontier box::
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 9:13 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM filtering on a budget
http://www.nwfusion.com/reviews/2003/0915spam.html
Here is how well they work in
This is what I'm wondering.
There has to be a mechanism on the receiving end to unencrypt this stuff.
-Original Message-
From: Dean Cunningham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 12:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Secure E-Mail
How does that enable
Very interesting.
So what's the point? I mean sure, you cant read it over the wire, but I
doubt that's what attorneys are worried about. More likely they are worried
about email falling into the wrong hands. So if I fat finger an email
address, the wrong recipient will still be able to read it,
Why do they want encryption? Is truly so it cant be sniffed over the wire or
is it more that they don't want email to fall into the wrong hands?
-Original Message-
From: Miller, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 2:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:
The patch was not redone. Just the wording of the alert.
-Original Message-
From: Wohlgemuth, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 5:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: patch MS03-046 update clarification
The way I read the update (ver 1.1) to this patch
You don't need Blat. Any person who calls themselves a developer should have
some knowledge of the different ways you can send mail with CDO.
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 6:57 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:
This is normal behavior for Exchange. It will grab every bit of memory it
can. It will also release memory if another program needs some.
You bought all that memory, do you really want to waste it just doing
nothing?
-Original Message-
From: Berepoot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Blackstone
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 7:25 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Store.exe in Task
Force a password change on all of them. If something is POPing it, that will
stop it.
-Original Message-
From: Jason Clishe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 5:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Disappearing email
I agree with what you're saying,
Its good to know they have been listening to what we have been saying for
years.
-Original Message-
From: Brian Ko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 2:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Upgrade 2000 to 2003
I just got out from Exchange 2003 Server
So the goal here is to save money on backup capacity?
-Original Message-
From: Steve Iadarola [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 8:53 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Excluding specific email message types from backups
Problem is that the entire company is
It kind of negates the whole reason for putting it there in the first place.
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 1:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Upgrade 2000 to 2003
I don't like putting a front-end server in
OL 2003 works great with Exchange 5.5
If you use OWA, there is hotfix you will want to install to ensure
compatability with OL2003 and E55 OWA users. There is also one for OL2003
rules that can cause issues with Exchange 5.5. If I could remember the KB
numbers I would post them.
-Original
Why would you do that?
NDR's are a very necessary tool. How is someone that is trying to email the
CEO know that his important message did not get delivered?
-Original Message-
From: Gagrani, Kishore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 9:39 AM
To: Exchange
Tested and rolled out.
-Original Message-
From: Ali Wilkes (IT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 11:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Hot off the Fixes
Anyone applied these yet?
I have an RSS newsfeed that tells me anytime MS makes a new download
available
-Original Message-
From: Chinnery, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 1:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hot off the Fixes
How did you hear about this (MS046)?
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Blackstone
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 1:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hot off the Fixes
I have an RSS newsfeed that tells me anytime MS makes a new download
available
-Original Message-
From: Chinnery, Paul [mailto
, 2003 4:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hot off the Fixes
I read Martins Email.
-- Rev. Kevinm WLKMMAS, Exchange MVP
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin
Blackstone
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 1:00 PM
To: Exchange
Right. Just the OWA box
-Original Message-
From: Jasa, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 1:30 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook 2K3 Exchange 5.5 CDO Patch 2657.55
MS PSS only had me patch the OWA server and I have not had a problem
since.
me how you did this? I just downloaded a RSS newsreader
and I don't know how to get it to work with MS..
Thanks
Russell
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 4:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hot off the Fixes
System Attendant
Services. For this reason, install the patch when no users are logged on
through OWA.
Does it really affect the Exchange Store if OWA is on a separate box?
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 12:52
Yes
-Original Message-
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 7:27 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Bulk set of primary smtp address
2000 or 5.5?
Sincerely,
Andrey Fyodorov
Systems Engineer
Messaging and Collaboration
Spherion
What version of Exchange are we talking about again?
-Original Message-
From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2003 8:42 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: priv1
I did another offline defrag and put a mailbox limit of 500 MB, but my
director has
email that comes from specified
persons)
* A bonus would be that if it could do a lookup against my GAL and
just dump any email for an address that does not exist
* Must run on Wintel platform
* Customizeable NDR's for content filtering, etc
Martin Blackstone
Director
I'm on a roll today.
Anyone know how to export all the data from Goldmine 5 or 6 and get it into
OL or Exch?
Martin Blackstone
Director, Information Technologies
Microsoft Exchange MVP
Superior Access Insurance Services
949.470.2111 x279
Goldmine to a CSV the mapping feature in the
OL
Import is pretty good about letting you choose the fields and properties you
want to import and to which OL fields they should be copied.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 1
?
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 1:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject
What happens when you open it from another PC? Do you have something other
than OL98 you can test this with?
-Original Message-
From: Watkins V [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 8:42 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: ??? on outlook folders
Dear all,
I have
What folders are they? Can you rename them?
-Original Message-
From: Watkins V [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 8:57 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: ??? on outlook folders
I've tried it on my machine with outlook 2000 and it still happens. I think
That blows.
On the upside, a recovery server can be a simple PC as long as it has enough
disk space.
-Original Message-
From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 11:10 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Repairing individual mailboxes
Hmm, well
This isn't a standard Cisco switch thing. You would need a Cisco load
balancer. Though I would probably look at F5 first.
BTW, these kinds of things are $$$
-Original Message-
From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 10:25 AM
To: Exchange
Well Jake, you can look at it like this.
The database isn't going to grow anymore until you fill up that white space,
so reducing its size may not do much. Sure it will free up disk space, but
chances are it will just get eaten up again.
There is always a risk when doing this kind of stuff. You
Do you have deleted item retention enabled?
24 Mb is a drop in the ocean.
-Original Message-
From: Jake Wallendal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 7:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Drives almost at capacity
my bad. The Priv and 24 MB when the
We do 30 days and have never needed any more. But different business's have
different needs.
Jake, I suspect if you cut that number in half today, by tomorrow you will
have a lot more white space to work with.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
Its not available. MS has it and will perhaps release it later. But right
now you cannot get it.
-Original Message-
From: Info1 Team [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 1:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RPCHTTP_Setup.vbs
Trying to find a vbscript called
No, it is not available.
-Original Message-
From: Info1 Team [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 1:38 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: RPCHTTP_Setup.vbs
What isn't available yet? The script? I've seen mention of it in several
magazine articles, and one
That doesn't change the fact that you cant get it.
Paul misspoke in those articles.
-Original Message-
From: Dean, Nathaniel, V. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 1:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: RPCHTTP_Setup.vbs
Quoted from Windows 2000 Magazine
That's exactly how I limit it as well. It cant be bigger than a single tape
can backup.
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 9:48 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Maximum MDB Database size on Exchange 5.5
In
In terabytes maybe, but for practical purposes, no.
-Original Message-
From: Morgan, Joshua (Greenville) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 1:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Mailbox Size Limits
Running:
Exchange 5.5 Enterprise w/SP4
Windows 2000 Sp4
Is
1. Yes
2. No
3. You cant directly upgrade Exchange 5.5 to 2003. If you need to keep
Exchange on the same hardware you will need to upgrade the OS to W2K, then
upgrade 5.5 to 2000, then upgrade 2003 to 2003, the upgrade the OS to 2003
if you choose.
The better solution would be to get a new
-
From: Martin Blackstone
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 2:15 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 and Windows 2003
1. Yes
2. No
3. You cant directly upgrade Exchange 5.5 to 2003. If you need to keep
Exchange on the same hardware you will need to upgrade the OS to W2K
-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 4:15 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 and Windows 2003
1. Yes
2. No
3. You cant directly upgrade Exchange 5.5 to 2003. If you need to keep
Exchange on the same hardware you will need
didn't phrase it right. If I install Exchange 5.5 on a Windows
2003 Server will that work in an NT 4.0 Domain Architecture? Thank again.
Mario
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 4:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject
The general ranking of preferred scan methods from top to bottom is ESE,
AVAPI, MAPI.
-Original Message-
From: Crumbaker, Ron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OT: Antigen
We have recently installed Antigen on our
You never use the AOL browser for OWA. IE works fine with AOL and that is
what users should be using to access OWA.
-Original Message-
From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 6:14 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA Messages View on
I told him to say that.
-Original Message-
From: Jasa, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 8:20 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups.
Thanks, Andy.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Those guys are PERFECT candidates for Outlook 2003 with Cache Mode.
-Original Message-
From: Gavin Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 8:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Use of OST's over WAN
I am looking for some light reading/information to confirm
I cant say one way or another. I never use offline mode.
However with OL2003 in cache mode, it will always use the cached mail.
-Original Message-
From: Gavin Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Use of OST's over
Setup a VPN with the PIX. There is no reason to waste all the money on one
if you are just going to turn it into swiss cheese to access Exchange.
Yes, RDP is necessary if you are trying to allow users to use Outlook at
home, but since a large number of consumer ISP's block it since MSBlast,
it's a
Upgrade to the Enterprise version.
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Shimmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 3:20 AM
Subject: Extracting to pst
Hi all
I have Power Control which I use to extract mailboxes when necessary.
I think it was Missy who said its hard to find something that works well
when BLB is broken by design.
-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 7:47 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Brick Level Backup
1.
2.
3.
-
Yes. You need the agent for any backing up of Exchange
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Shimmons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 8:06 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Brick Level Backup
Arcserve was not my choice. Although the latest version actually
And we liked it!
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 12:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Suspened email account.
I remember when there was no e-mail.
Ed
--- Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I remember
I flushed my logs
-Original Message-
From: Finch Brett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 2:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Online Defragmentation
Typically by default, every 24hours after startup is when you should see
1221 priv. So are you saying
No way. Never do it manually, never.
Way to often people move or delete their log files and hose the whole
system. Next thing you know they are on the phone with PSS.
Use the tools provided by Exchange to do the job. In your case, the
optimizer.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Megginson
You could take the work IT out of these kinds of statements and put in
anything you want and it would come out exactly the same
-Original Message-
From: Joel Wampler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 6:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Deckler
Since you didn't reboot after the patch, its possible the server was left in
a state of limbo or something.
-Original Message-
From: Erik Renberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 8:14 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MS03-039 E2K
I might have had some
And an SDLT tape drive to go along with it.
-Original Message-
From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 10:40 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: New Server
A Compaq DL380 G2 (G3 would be better) with one or two CPUs, 1GB of ram
Two 36GB
Known issues with the performance optimizer. But there is a patch to fix it.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 1:26 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Win2k SP 4 with Exchange 5.5
Does anyone else have this same setup
Please elaborate
-Original Message-
From: John Strongosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 1:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2k SP 4 with Exchange 5.5
yes, ex5.5 sp4 won't work with win2ksp4 as of last weekend when I had to
rebuild a server.
Yes
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 1:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2k SP 4 with Exchange 5.5
Hmm... Patch to Exchange or to the OS?
-Original Message-
From: John Strongosky [mailto:[EMAIL
It sounds like the former.
Anyhow, most ISP's are now blocking port 135. So the solution is VPN or OWA.
-Original Message-
From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 10:27 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook clients can't connect to
When you say local address book, do you mean a .PAB?
Also, 1.7 GB is pretty darn big for a PST. Search the HD for Scanpst.exe and
run it a bunch of times. Then retire that PST. They typically start to
corrupt when they go over a gig though the limit is 2.
-Original Message-
From: Guy
Typically you want the page file on the fastest array. RAID 5 is actually
the slowest in your setup.
As for the size, I'm sure whatever its at now is sufficient.
-Original Message-
From: Chyka Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 7:41 AM
To: Exchange
Ok, so DNS is probably OK. But is the mail server actually responding.
Telnet to port 25 on it and try to manually send a message.
-Original Message-
From: John Parker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 8:31 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Delayed Email
They happen all the time. Mail servers go down just like any other system.
Its just the way it is.
-Original Message-
From: John Parker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 8:58 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Delayed Email
Tried that.
Connect failed.
I would imagine not. Officescan is for workstations. You need ServerProtect
which will run on W2K3
-Original Message-
From: Jason Clishe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 9:44 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OT: OfficeScan on Windows Server 2003?
Does
Its on the trend site
http://www.trendmicro.com/download/product.asp?productid=8
http://www.trendmicro.com/download/product.asp?productid=8
From the Readme:
Trend Micro ScanMail(TM) 6.2 for Microsoft(TM) Exchange 2000 and 2003
Martin Blackstone
Director, Information Technologies
I think that point is that it isn't for you to make that decision. Getting
it in writing from HR takes the potential for issues off of you.
As an example where I work if there is a request by a manager or another
employee to read ones email, it must be signed off on by the CEO and then
HR. I
Agreed. Also see if you can delete the message in OWA.
-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 1:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Problem deleting e-mails
So you disabled it and you still couldnt delete the emails?
Yea. I know.
-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 1:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Problem deleting e-mails
Im taking bets what vendor he is using.
- Original Message -
From: Chris Scharff [EMAIL
Did you reboot after disabling the AV services on the server? Try that.
You may have to uninstall the AV. BTW, which AV is on the server?
-Original Message-
From: Adam Berns [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 1:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE:
I never really understand why people want to change it. Yea, I know
security, but what does that really help?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 1:14 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Problem deleting e-mails
?
- Original Message -
From: Erik Sojka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 4:15 PM
Subject: RE: Problem deleting e-mails
Maybe a new SMTP banner prevents thread hijacking...
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone
??
Thanks
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 4:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Problem deleting e-mails
I never really understand why people want to change it. Yea, I know
security, but what does
Did we ever get an answer on what AV product it was?
-Original Message-
From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 2:41 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Problem deleting e-mails
Any one of these get you going in the right direction?
Well, I would look real carefully at that list and ask a lot of questions of
where it came from. I would seriously doubt that 70,000 people have asked to
receive mail from you. Chances are that this list came from somewhere else.
If that's the case, trouble is brewing.
Chances are your ISP has
I wouldn't be so sure of that. I just received a rather unkind note from my
ISP for a UCE blast that was sent out from here without my prior knowledge.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 7:26 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
I never quite get this. The company sets a retention period of 60 days, then
wants to know how to archive important mails. Well, every email every user
gets is important to them. So the retention policy is really no policy at
all.
Anyhow, check out mailbox manager from the Exchange SP4 service
You talk funny
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 10:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Email Retention Policies
The mailbox management feature in 5.5 will allow you to set retention
policies, archiving of
If by weird you mean wrecked, then yes you are correct.
-Original Message-
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 2:33 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Appointments not Showing in Outlook
Scanning M: drive for viruses or backing it up
Are you using it with E55 or E2K?
-Original Message-
From: John Strongosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 7:48 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM Product
Karen, here you go...
john
We just purchased MailFrontier and I have to say this is the most
When you get it, send it to me.
-Original Message-
From: Alverson, Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 12:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA just quit after years of running - error 'ASP 0115'
Thanks. Looks like I need to call PSS to get the file.
So go get the hotfix. That's what I just did. Took less than 5 minutes
-Original Message-
From: Alverson, Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 1:01 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA just quit after years of running - error 'ASP 0115'
Once I have
Glad I could help!
-Original Message-
From: John Parker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 8:32 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Forwarding Email
Thank you Gentleman.
John Parker, MCSE
IS Admin.
Senior Technical Specialist
Digital Display Systems.
simpler and
the performance is probably much better than a straight VPN solution.
I think if you look it at all the factors there is a positive ROI.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 9:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
and the performance
is
probably much better than a straight VPN solution. I think if you look
it at
all the factors there is a positive ROI.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 9:43 PM
To: Exchange
.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 10:45 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue
That's what I kept thinking
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
Make sure their ISP isn't blocking VPN. Some broadband ones do.
-Original Message-
From: Eric Holtzclaw [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 9:10 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Weird RRAS Issue
Problem:
20 Users get in using W9x SE, W2K, and XP VPN clients
I wish I was a CEO. I would love to be able to sit around all day and know
that the biggest issue was this...
-Original Message-
From: Wade Robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 11:53 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: reocurring appointments assinged to a
That's certainly an option, but a much more costly one IMHO.
-Original Message-
From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue
Have you considered Terminal Server or (better yet)
Hank, a VPN is going to be the solution you have to impliment. You are
correct about the ISP's. They are not going to open up 135 again. Even if
some do, most will not.
Let me ask a couple of questions.
How many users do you have?
What VPN solution were you testing?
What did you mean in the
I'm blaming the pizza I just had for the big jump in gas.
-Original Message-
From: Bill Kuhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sobig.F alert
Can we blame this virus for the big jump in gas prices today?
-Original
Sounds like BAS
-Original Message-
From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 6:20 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook to Exchange over VPN issues
Huh?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
We do. We have an SMTP AV gateway/Anti SPAM box. Exchange AV. Desktop and
Server AV.
Remember, if a VPN or dialup user opens their hotmail at home and launches a
virus, its going straight for the OL contacts via Exchange. An SMTP gateway
isnt going to help you one bit. The desktop MAY catch it.
101 - 200 of 2003 matches
Mail list logo
