David, Andy mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cool. A dog thread.
Bah.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
_
List posting FAQ:
Yeah, and the bad thing about Trend's license model is that it is per user,
so if you have 600 users, but only 250 computers (like in a school setting),
you pay a lot more.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original
PST = bad.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Alverson, Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 12:48 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Race between client rules and
headers.exe.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Hatley, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 3:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Export and Import of fields
think
you have to do it with the /o and options file, I just don't know the
proper syntax.
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 2:54 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Export and Import of fields
headers.exe.
Steven
That was my wondering, also. Jees, why didn't you just add a couple more
18GB drives to your existing RAID5 (assuming) array?
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Brian Dugas [mailto:[EMAIL
Not really, just restore the previous full and replay the logs. You should
have the store on one redundant array, and your logs on another. This
should protect you from both drive and array failures.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis
Where are your logs going to go? I'd put both stores on one array, logs on
another.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003
MS ISA specifically has this problem.
See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;304340
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday,
This sounds like something best handled by Outlook VBA code. Check out
slipstick.com, and Sue Mosher's Outlook Programming book.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Guy Fortin [mailto:[EMAIL
Agreed. Particularly seeing as how I did weekly full, daily incremental,
and am now switching Backup Exec to daily full as I write this!
Tony, might I suggest a nap. ;)
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original
Use Earthlink's SMTP server as your outbound relay. If it originates from
their network, their SMTP server should relay for you.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Jim Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL
You're correct. SBS can not be added to an existing domain. It must be the
one and only domain controller.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
While I use a custom SpamAssassin/Linux setup here, we looked at GFI
MailEssentials. For our setup (~400 mailboxes), it was only $950.
My advice would be to find someone who does know Linux (a student, maybe?)
and have them assist you in setting up a Linux/SpamAssassin box. There are
many, many
http://www.slipstick.com/calendar/skedresource.htm
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Tony Nguyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 11:53 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
BLAT.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Gonzalez, Alex [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 9:43 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Sending email via a batch file
We
with CDO.
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 6:57 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sending email via a batch file
BLAT.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis
We have a Linux gateway in front of our Exchange box, however I still
applied the patch just to be safe. No problems here.
Exchange 5.5, Win2k SP4, single site, single server.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original
Is this a VBA app? Have you self-signed it so Outlook trusts it?
If it's standalone, I can't help. Never done that. Try Slipstick.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Ali Wilkes (IT)
It won't. You can't even run the install for OWA 5.5 on a Win2k3 server,
much less the full Exchange 5.5 install. So in this case, not supported =
won't work.
I'd take Martin's advice. Wait until you upgrade your NT4 domain to AD,
then buy a new server, install Win2003 as a member, install
servers are in a new Exchange ORG.
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 4:02 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: E2K migration issue
Leave up the old Ex5.5 server for a little while. Outlook will see that
it's mailbox has
Out of curiosity, why are you doing this with Outlook Rules? I would use
the Alternate Recipient option. We do this here for a few teachers who
aren't on campus most of the day.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
Hi all,
I'm currently creating a test lab for my Exchange 5.5 to E2K/E2K3
migration. We are a single AD domain shop, with a single Exchange server
(thus single site).
Currently, I've:
- Setup a AD DC on production
- Setup DNS secondary on said box
- Let it sync nice a good
- Taken it
Could be anything. Are your servers on SP3 or SP4? Have you patched for
MS03-026? Running with the most recent AV defs? Have you read about the
MSBLAST worm?
On the hardware front, have you tried replacing the switch that your servers
are on?
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Leave up the old Ex5.5 server for a little while. Outlook will see that
it's mailbox has moved to a new server, and update the profile itself.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Bennett, Joshua
Hi guys,
I'm getting ready to add a Windows 2003 DC to my Win2k AD network,
which will eventually be an all Win2k3 AD domain. However, I'm also
planning an Exchange 2000 upgrade in a matter of weeks. My question is,
will I be able to run Forestprep and Domainprep against the Win2k3 AD?
compelling upgrade story than E2K.
From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:29:31 -0400
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain?
Hi guys,
I'm getting ready to add
I believe that would more be a function of the MUA, not Exchange.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Brett Wesoloski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 7:47 AM
To:
I think someone needs a nap.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Strange
hardware requirements I
believe.
Whether or not it is worth $1000 for you is not really a question I can
answer. It is for customers who hire me to do the work, since I performed my
last E2K migration the weekend after TechEd and haven't looked back since.
From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED
This month's TechNet included an eval version of Exchange 2003 Standard.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 12:51 PM
I think he meant Yes, it CAN be run during the day. Yes, it SHOULD be run
off hours.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06,
As has McAfee Groupshield.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Wilson, Fenton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 12:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MIMAIL virus
Use your ISP's SMTP server as a smarthost for all outgoing mail.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Bubba G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 9:12 AM
To: Exchange
ANY more information you could give us would help. What do you mean you
can't get it to work?
Have you checked the FAQ? Appendix H covers this topic.
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_appxh.htm
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis
While this question is better answered on an AD list, or even WinNT-L, I'll
bite.
It depends on the size of your network. It's generally recommended, on
large networks, to separate DNS/DHCP from AD servers, because of logons.
Let's say your company of 1 all log on at 8am EST. We'll, during
Can you provide more information, or point me in the direction of said
information, regarding this DHCP security vulnerability.
Thanks,
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley
Are you sure she's not just deleting her Inbox folder? Q215604.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 11:51 AM
To: Exchange
itself?
Example:
Sending to [EMAIL PROTECTED] sits in my queue and wont deliver
But
If I send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] it get's delivered fine
Mail.kpafilms.com is the MX record
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 3
Exchange version and SP level?
Windows version and SP level?
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Friese, Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 8:49 AM
To: Exchange
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: misconfigured sender
Windows 2000 SP3
Exchange 2000 SP2 - can remember I put on SP3 or not and I forget where
to find out the level!
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 8:54 AM
To: Exchange
. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 9:11 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: misconfigured sender
I'm not running Ex2k just yet, so my help is limited. However...
While
Andrey,
I ran into this same issue shortly after we upgraded our domain to
Win2k AD last summer. Funny thing was, all the lockouts were coming from
Windows 98 workstations. I could never put my finger on it, and in
desperation finally disabled account lockouts. However, invalid password
If the sending and receiving mail servers, as well as any in-between support
it, TLS is an option.
Personally, I'd encrypt the e-mails using GnuPG. www.gnupg.org
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 3:12 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: misconfigured sender
Can we get the full headers for that NDR?
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] it get's delivered fine
Mail.kpafilms.com is the MX record
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 3:12 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: misconfigured sender
Can we get the full headers for that NDR
/administrators) get a little
over excited using technology we don't really have to use.
Well, just my 5 cents.
-Patrick
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17. heinäkuuta 2003 19:04
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sending Secure Mail over
Sell the SQL box eBay.
Use the proceeds to buy two new servers that are more appropriately sized to
your environment.
Have a beer.
:)
I doubt you'll have any performance issues, but you will at some point
encounter downtime issues. In addition, you will be complicating your
environment buy
Cringe
Opera, Konquerer/Safari, Mozilla (Firebird, K-Meleon, Gecko, etc, etc),
Links, Lynx...
Get out of your Windows world.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Lalor, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL
For some reason, it would appear that your mail server is delaying the
message, instead of trying the next highest MX record. Having two MX
records, with the first being unavailable, is common practice (at least in
the *nix world), where the higher-level MX is an SMTP gateway.
Unfortunately, I
: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 11:52 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: misconfigured sender
For some reason, it would appear that your mail server is delaying the
message, instead of trying the next highest MX record. Having two MX
records
I'd look into some kind of web-based file storage solution. I'm planning on
implementing something similar this summer. I'll allow faculty to logon,
upload a file, and designate who can access it.
While Public Folders isn't the best way, it's better than individual copies
of the attachments in
SIS in Ex5.5? For some reason I thought that was only on E2K and above.
Cool.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Ward, Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 11:24 AM
I was wondering what that smell was last time I ran a defrag...
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 10:38 AM
To:
This one uses OpenBSD.
http://lawmonkey.org/anti-spam.html
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Paul Hutchings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 8:59 AM
To: Exchange
Data this old, I wouldn't put it anywhere NEAR my production environment.
You can use a spare desktop machine for this type of work. Build a new
server, and restore your data to that. If I were you, I'd keep it off the
same LAN as your production servers, also. Through it on a test-lab VLAN,
if
Ouch. Don't. Everything I've read says that this will be the seventh sign
that brings about Armageddon.
Use NTBackup on your Exchange 2000 Server to backup to a file, then backup
that file to tape using Arcserve.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key
is available and I can choose
the server I want, but like I said previously this does not seem to
allow for selective restore/backup on a per mailbox scale.
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 02 June 2003 17:48
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE
Well, I've only used this setup in the *nix world. However, this is how it
tends to work.
The sending SMTP server does an MX lookup on the e-mail destination domain,
and grabs the address of the lowest numbered MX.
It attempts to make an SMTP connection to that server. If it fails, it will
You have to set it up to accept mail (aka be a relay for) the primary e-mail
domain. It doesn't know it's a secondary MX, per sea, it just knows that
it's supposed to accept mail for a certain domain. Then, during it's
delivery attempt, it determines where to send it (via DNS or manual routes).
Wow, I must be tired. Way too many pronouns this morning.
Sorry.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:39 AM
Host and clients with these IP addresses is checked and populated with 3
internal addresses for Canon Image Runner copiers that can send email.
I'd bet money that's your problem. I had my Exchange server setup like this
at one point, for a Mac client with an old version of Eudora that didn't
School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:43 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Open Relay Help
Host and clients with these IP addresses is checked and populated with 3
internal addresses
Nope, all good now.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: Taylor, Skip [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:44 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Open Relay Help
I
Agreed. It drives me nuts, as I do sender address verification using null
senders. It's okay to reject null senders for multiple recipients, but not
for just one! I'm also amazed at the number of sites that just ignore
e-mails I send informing them of their RFC violation.
Steven
---
Steven
65 matches
Mail list logo
