This is another question that I know has been asked and answered to various degrees
(some more helpful than others), but I need to make sure I have the configuration
straight.
One configuration I'm presenting for OWA is Frontend (DMZ) to Backend (Internal). I'm
allowing only HTTPS to the
If your implementation is Exchange 5.5 with Win9x/ME clients, you may need to consider
the WINS impact (static entries?) to the clients. Also re-configure any connectors
that may be hard-coded with IP addresses instead of network names. Other than that,
you should be all clear.
Eric
Does this user have the same problem opening a web page in Internet Explorer? If not,
have him connect to his mailbox using OWA in the meantime, or by mapping a drive
directly to his mailbox on ExIFS and opening messages using a browser. Either way,
without a lot more info I have a hard time
If you can't change any of the settings in the display control panel, then I think
it's safe to say that either the incorrect video card driver is installed or that the
video card driver is not being loaded properly by Windows 98. To check this, in the
Control Panel Display applet, is the
Original Message ---
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:00 -0700
If you can't change any of the settings in the display control panel, then
I think it's safe to say that either the incorrect video card driver is
installed or that the
Smack me if you want - this doesn't answer your question BUT, it seems to me that
since Exchange 2000 supports IMAP4 natively that there's very little reason to
implement POP3 over IMAP4 unless your users don't have the clients.
Eric (thank you sir may I have another)
Original
Almost completely off-topic, but just because you state that you're not responsible
for any of your negligent actions does not make it so. If that was the case, I'd put
a big bumper sticker on my car saying it's not my fault if I run you over (which I
probably will if you get in my way).
Per KB article (below) these ports must be opened for F/E B/E OWA to work (not
included in the list is HTTP but that one's easy). My question is, assuming multiple
Domain Controllers and a single GC - which servers need 88, 389, 445, 3268 available?
All domain controllers or just the GC?
Never mind. I found the answer nested in a KB article. Here it is if you're
interested.
--
RESOLUTION
Instead of creating two SMTP connectors with the same address space and bridgehead
(but different smart host), try creating a single connector with multiple smart hosts.
You can do
I would try setting some Performance Monitors on the server so you can see if anything
odd happens leading up to the crash (if it recurs). The only time I can recall
something similar to that happening was when a fledgeling (engineer) tried to send a
2Gb Ghost Image file across a cc:Mail
Where I used to work, the most common reason for me getting paged at 3 am was because
someone was sending their Napster directories from work to home using E-mail (this was
a very large and well-known organization that happened to be run by idiots). While
the need for limits should be obvious
The argument is that E-mail is not the proper method for transferring files. Why?
Because E-mail is not point-to-point. If you have a 30Mb file you'd like to send me,
it would make much more sense to make it available to a browser or FTP client and then
send me a link. If you decide to
Don't worry, I'm done :)
Still, that attitude is exactly the reason that I left my last job. Touchy subject to
those of us who have done our time in operations support. Bitter memories. Very
bitter.
Original Message ---
From: Mike Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:
I doubt you'll get what you need here. This is more of a technical
question/answer/sounding board than it is a free consulting service.
Original Message ---
From: Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
Dear All:
We have an Exchange
Is this a haiku?
This line has seven syllables
No wait, it had eight.
Original Message ---
From: Drewski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:54:50 -0500
very good, Mike!
the haiku is more
than just seven syllables,
five fore and after.
Drew (MOS)
How do you address the E-mail we're talking about? Lots of times I've seen no
transport provider errors caused by users putting quotes around e-mail addresses in
the Outlook address field. Just a shot in the dark, but I'm not entirely sure I know
which messages you're talking about.
Are you familiar with usenet? If so, might I recommend
alt.support.depression.pst
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:27:31 +0100 , Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
OK, so perhaps I should add a little more information here.
Believe me, I KNOW .pst files are bad. And, in light of what
I would not agree with this assessment without first seeing the entire contents of the
event AND finding out if it's actually causing any problems. Is it? Or are you just
worried because there are red stop signs in your event log?
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 09:26:47 -0500 , Exchange Discussions
Nope. Sorry, you'll have to either manually enter them (or import them using CSV file
and the field Secondary-Proxy-Addresses if you want to do bulk changes). It sucks
but them's the breaks.
Eric
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:00:14 -0400 , Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Is it
Slow down cowboy! When you first got the -1018 pop up, what was going on in the
Application log? It's possible you just needed to patch the database. Check your
logs and report back.
Eric
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:03:11 -0500, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi everybody!
It's encrypted with a key pair. The key resides in the profile in the registry. Are
you saying the profile AND the mailbox have both been deleted?
Eric
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:11:43 -0500, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What utilitie or procedure can be used to extract
If anyone finds a way, let me know because I want my Exchange server to say And
then... instead of CR LF
(Dude Where's My Car RULES!)
Eric
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:18:10 -0400, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You can configure the text for SMTP responses. Some SMTP servers
Are there any anti=virus programs running on the server? If so stop them and re-try.
Eric
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:16:47 +0100 , Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
At the moment, I'm trying to add another server on the same subnet across a
100mb switched LAN
The connection
eric: SMTP 250-NO AND THEN
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:22:24 -0500 , Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
and then?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 3:08 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: NDR that
Any firewalls between the user's workstation and the Exchange server (specifically
blocking UDP)? This can make it appear that mail is taking a long time to arrive,
when the culprit is the PIX preventing Exchange from updating the client view.
Eric
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:12:46 -0400,
Not everyone works for free.
Eric
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:40:30 -0400, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
to see the password you need to have a valide license
.
- Original Message -
From: Scharff, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can anyone in your org address the All Students DL? If it's just for administrative
staff you could try training them to address this list in the BCC: field so the
address info would not be sent along with the message.
I agree with another post on this topic - I think you've gone too far to
If E-mail reliability (aka - uptime) is paramount, the case is almost made for you.
Do a simple cost/benefit analysis of taking the database off-line to defrag it.
Cost = Downtime of Exchange server
Benefit = 2Gb of additional free space (unless the server is low on space, benefit is
almost
At the risk of sounding stoopid (well, more stoopid) - this means that BCC'ing would
solve his problem, yes? Hotmail wouldn't reject the messages because they'd be
individually delivered. That's what I originally thought but my brain is working at
around 40% capacity after this weekend and I
It doesn't get sent to swynk.com - only the sender's E-mail address, so I don't think
this will do anything.
Eric
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:26:21 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time), Exchange Discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Instead of the public folder thing, I specified not to send ooo to
I have a little something to add. I managed the ARC enterprise E-mail system until
about 3 months ago so I have a pretty good idea of how the ARC works.
If you want to give money to ARC to help the cause, do not go through www.redcross.org
or the national organization. First, bureaucracy
Thanks. For Washington, DC Chapter donations (I've worked directly with this chapter
in the past - they are VERY good at what they do):
http://www.redcrossdc.org/TopMenu/donation_information.php3
Remember that we're a big country and if everyone helps it doesn't take much. Let's
show the
I have some month-old turkey in my refrigerator. I'll leave it out tonight and ship
it off tomorrow. It'll do in a pinch.
If that won't do, it may be time to contact MS PSS - if you don't want to pay I'll
give you my credit card.
Eric
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 09:59:14 -0700, Exchange
Have you scheduled the directory replication on BOTH SIDES of the DirRep connectors?
Perhaps your bridgehead is only requesting updates at night, but your spokes are
requesting 8 times per day (default IIRC).
Eric
On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 14:28:46 +0200, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Are you wishing to keep them from replying to all, replying to the sender, or both?
If you want to keep them from replying to all you can go about it a couple of ways.
First, on the Delivery Restrictions tab of the System DL, only allow yourself (and any
others necessary) to address mail to
Exchange 2000 or earlier? Sorry if this has already been asked later in the
discussion - my WebMail is slooowww today.
If it's Ex2k, ExIFS should handle this very easily using directory contents of the M:\
drive. If not, I can't think of a way to do it without coding.
Eric
On Mon, 17 Sep
I'm pretty sure you can disable sync requests on startup using the registry. I can't
remember how off-hand - I lost my Notes From the Field book. There's a great section
in it specifically on tweaking bridgeheads. I think some of your problem is the mesh
configuration, though. It makes it
Go to Tools/Services. Are there 2 instances of Microsoft Exchange Server listed?
If so, delete one.
Eric
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 11:35:26 -0500, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Good morning all,
My problem is that when I open my E2k mailbox in Outlook 2000, I get my my
inbox
whinning
'nuff said
Eric
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 10:41:16 -0400, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
ARGH!! that's high on my list of pet peeves!!
-Michèle
Immigration site: http://LadySun1969.tripod.com
Our new 2001 Miata: http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley
Tiggercam:
derp. good point. Multiple MAPI profiles doesn't work regardless of the situation.
In past instances of Outlook, you could add multiple instances of the same mailbox in
the Advanced/Open Additional Mailboxes, correct? Back in the day I could have sworn I
tested this with the Postmaster
Is there another answer to this? I'm curious because in my old environment there were
2 methods for creating mailboxes and accounts. On the central domain, we used User
Manager for Domains to create accounts and Exchange Admin Tool for mailboxes (stupid
secondary proxy addresses). For
Check the Application Log for clues.
Eric
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 11:04:43 +0200, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hello
My exchange server crashed. I built another one with the same and
organization and restored the exchange database from backup. Now the MTA
will not start.
Haiku Monday:
Welcome to Exchange
where listites provide free help.
We are all anal.
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 13:31:40 -0700, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Flynn,
Thanks - that's exactly what I was hoping to hear.
BTW, it really is effect, not affect. Affect as a noun
I think what he means is to go and try synching the mailbox on another workstation.
If the results are the same, there's a mailbox problem otherwise the client is
probably the problem.
Eric
On Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:56:54 -0500, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
We don't have
Do Win2k AD controllers need to be GCs for Exchange to use them in a single domain
environment? Tony Redmond's book says that all DCs in a single domain environment are
effectively GCs - but do they need to be made GCs on the NTDS page for Exchange to
use them? Thanks - I'm still getting up
Let's say the GC server is not available for some reason or another, but there are
other domain controllers. Can Exchange still do its job? That's basically my
question. Thanks.
Eric
On Tue, 18 Sep 2001 14:26:02 -0700, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You need at least one
Thanks, I think that was what I was looking for. I wasn't certain whether Exchange
could ONLY query GCs or if they could get info from DCs as well. In any case, I'm
thinking that there should be 2 GCs even in a small single-domain environment, just
for redundancy's sake. Otherwise the GC
The nice thing about MAILsweeper for SMTP (and I'm assuming others - I haven't used
them) is that you can quarantine messages, not just block them. We had MAILsweeper
quarantine all suspicious incoming content and send a notification to the recipient
that they had a message in quarantine.
48 matches
Mail list logo
