Exchange 2000 direcory access
We have 2 Exchange 2000 SP3 servers and 2 domain controllers (Windows 2000 SP4). It's a very small, single domain environment with less than 100 users. Recently we had a power/UPS problem where a UPS cut out completely, killing power to one of the domain controllers. The 2 Exchange servers and the other domain controller remained running throughout. During the outage, a number of users could not access their mailboxes (everyone uses either outlook 2000 or 2002). Most of those users simply had to restart their Outlook application, and they were in (although I had hoped that would be more seem-less...but whatever) There was however one user who was unable to get into his mailbox until we had restored power to that DC. That's problem #1. The other problem is, I think, more severe. Even after both DC's were running again, one of the Exchange servers only reports seeing one DC in its directory access tab. (obviously that's the DC that was never shut down) The other Exchange server shows both DC's normally. Both DC's are also GC's. The DC that had shutdown holds all FSMO rolls. Everything is on a simple LAN, and physical connectivity does not appear to be the problem. I've run DSAdiag 2 on the Exchange server in question and it does indeed show both DC's and I've run DCdiag on both the DC's and everything appears to be normal. I guess my question is 2 part: 1. Why did that one user have such a problem connecting during the outage and 2. Why is one Exchange Server not seeing that DC since it's been restored...or is it actually seeing it and the interface just isn't reporting it? Thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Single instance storage anyway to revert?
Hey I noticed this message a while back and had kept it just in case. We just performed the same procedure you did: moved a large # of mailboxes (eventually all of them) from Server A to Server B. When each mailbox arrived they were double, triple or even greater in size than they had been on Server A. We used Active Directory Users and Computers to move the mailboxes. I figured that while some mailboxes were on A, some on B, this would be normal, but now that EVERY mailbox is on B (and thus every message) I would have expected the mailboxes to revert back to their original size...but that hasn't happened. Both servers are Exchange 2000 SP3. Just curious as to what the end result of this was for you. Thanks Joe Berthiaume Systems Engineer Elias Sports Bureau, Inc. -Original Message- From: Microsoft Exchange List Server [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 1:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Single instance storage anyway to revert? MSX2000+SP3 1forest After moving from one mailbox store to a second (same server) all the mailboxes arrved to the new store with sizes at least twiece bigger as in the original, anyway to reduce or compress or set back to original size the mailbox sizes in the new store? Thanks, -er _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
public folder replicas and redundancy
2 Exchange servers. Exchange 2000 sp3, Windows 2000 SP3.
Started out with one Exchange server, ServerA. ServerA contains a complete copy of the
public store as well as the mailbox store. ServerB was brought online a short time ago
because ServerA is running low on disk space and horsepower, so weâre hoping to move
to ServerB.
Using System Manager I configured all our public folders to replicate to ServerB. I
thought that this would mean that ServerB would then carry the load of public folder
requests, should the public store on ServerA not be available. This however doesnât
appear to be the case. If I dismount the public store on ServerA, and then try to
access the public folders, I get an angry âunable to display the folder
(ServerA).â
Does ServerA need to be turned off altogether for B to answer requests for the public
folders? Or is there just something I missed somewhere in setting this up. I know in
Exchange 5.5 there was the concept of folder âhomingâ but thatâs gone now
isnât it? All I did was use ESM to go to the top level public folders, set up the
replication, and then propagated it down. The pub store size on ServerB is indeed
large, suggesting that all the data is thereâ¦but itâs just not answering the
bellâ¦
Thanks I advance.
Ëi¢Ëb@Bm§ÿðà 0w ¢oëzÊ.Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ÿÃ
,Ã)är¿²+^±æ«r ìyªÜ
«)N§²æìr¸zf¢Ú%y«Þ{!jx Ë0Êy ¢a1r§ââ²Ö)åËZvh§³ §Ê
RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
Well we did that...but there's no option for default public folder...both systems are Exchange 2000... -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: public folder replicas and redundancy Check the properties of the storage group and see where the default public folder is located. John Matteson Geac Corporate ISS (404) 239 - 2981 Atlanta, Georgia, USA. -Original Message- From: Joe Berthiaume [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: public folder replicas and redundancy 2 Exchange servers. Exchange 2000 sp3, Windows 2000 SP3. Started out with one Exchange server, ServerA. ServerA contains a complete copy of the public store as well as the mailbox store. ServerB was brought online a short time ago because ServerA is running low on disk space and horsepower, so weâre hoping to move to ServerB. Using System Manager I configured all our public folders to replicate to ServerB. I thought that this would mean that ServerB would then carry the load of public folder requests, should the public store on ServerA not be available. This however doesnât appear to be the case. If I dismount the public store on ServerA, and then try to access the public folders, I get an angry âunable to display the folder (ServerA).â Does ServerA need to be turned off altogether for B to answer requests for the public folders? Or is there just something I missed somewhere in setting this up. I know in Exchange 5.5 there was the concept of folder âhomingâ but thatâs gone now isnât it? All I did was use ESM to go to the top level public folders, set up the replication, and then propagated it down. The pub store size on ServerB is indeed large, suggesting that all the data is thereâ¦but itâs just not answering the bell⦠Thanks I advance. .+--xm ,)r(ື \æªb=!6 0 à§zÇ1r,:.Ë mé[hy\z[,)rÉZ Zvh'+-iÙ¢2 G( .rzrmyzrÅvi .+-¦-xm¶ÿà ,Â)Ür¿ë(º· ýì\ öªÙÈb½ë!¶Úÿ 0³ §ÊþÈzÇȱæ«r¬¥:.˱Êâmé[hæ¯yì\ ©àz[,Ã)ärÅÈZËZvh§+-iÙ¢Ì2G(
RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
John-
Thanks for the help. Yeah the A and B are both in the same routing group...they are in
the same site. ServerA is right now the master, and B is a member.
We moved a user's mailbox from ServerA to ServerB. Now that user on ServerB can access
public folders when the public store on ServerA is unavailable, and all the users
who's mailboxes are on ServerA still cannot.
-Joe
-Original Message-
From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
Okay.. I made the assumption that Server A and Server B were in the same routing
group? Are they? If not, does the connector that goes between the two routing groups
allow referrals across the connector?
John Matteson
Geac Corporate ISS
(404) 239 - 2981
Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Berthiaume [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:51 PM
Posted To: Exchange Discussion List
Conversation: public folder replicas and redundancy
Subject: RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
Well we did that...but there's no option for default public folder...both systems are
Exchange 2000...
-Original Message-
From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:41 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
Check the properties of the storage group and see where the default public folder is
located.
John Matteson
Geac Corporate ISS
(404) 239 - 2981
Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Berthiaume [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:01 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: public folder replicas and redundancy
2 Exchange servers. Exchange 2000 sp3, Windows 2000 SP3.
Started out with one Exchange server, ServerA. ServerA contains a complete copy of the
public store as well as the mailbox store. ServerB was brought online a short time ago
because ServerA is running low on disk space and horsepower, so weâre hoping to move
to ServerB.
Using System Manager I configured all our public folders to replicate to ServerB. I
thought that this would mean that ServerB would then carry the load of public folder
requests, should the public store on ServerA not be available. This however doesnât
appear to be the case. If I dismount the public store on ServerA, and then try to
access the public folders, I get an angry âunable to display the folder
(ServerA).â
Does ServerA need to be turned off altogether for B to answer requests for the public
folders? Or is there just something I missed somewhere in setting this up. I know in
Exchange 5.5 there was the concept of folder âhomingâ but thatâs gone now
isnât it? All I did was use ESM to go to the top level public folders, set up the
replication, and then propagated it down. The pub store size on ServerB is indeed
large, suggesting that all the data is thereâ¦but itâs just not answering the
bellâ¦
Thanks I advance.
.+--xm
,)r(ື \æªb=!6
0
à§zÇ1r,:.Ë
mé[hy\z[,)rÉZ Zvh'+-iÙ¢2 G(
.rzrmyzrÅvi
.+--xm
,)r(ື \æªb=!6
0
à§zÇ1r,:.Ë
mé[hy\z[,)rÉZ Zvh'+-iÙ¢2 G(
.rzrmyzrÅvi
Ëi¢Ëb@Bm§ÿðà 0w ¢oëzÊ.Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ÿÃ
,Ã)är¿²+^±æ«r ìyªÜ
«)N§²æìr¸zf¢Ú%y«Þ{!jx Ë0Êy ¢a1r§ââ²Ö)åËZvh§³ §Ê
RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
Ah. gotcha...thanks a lot John.
-Original Message-
From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 3:26 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
Okay. Go to the individual mailbox stores (not the storage group) on Server A.
Open the properties page and set the Default Public folder store to Server B.
John Matteson
Geac Corporate ISS
(404) 239 - 2981
Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Berthiaume [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 3:12 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
John-
Thanks for the help. Yeah the A and B are both in the same routing group...they are in
the same site. ServerA is right now the master, and B is a member.
We moved a user's mailbox from ServerA to ServerB. Now that user on ServerB can access
public folders when the public store on ServerA is unavailable, and all the users
who's mailboxes are on ServerA still cannot.
-Joe
-Original Message-
From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
Okay.. I made the assumption that Server A and Server B were in the same routing
group? Are they? If not, does the connector that goes between the two routing groups
allow referrals across the connector?
John Matteson
Geac Corporate ISS
(404) 239 - 2981
Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Berthiaume [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:51 PM
Posted To: Exchange Discussion List
Conversation: public folder replicas and redundancy
Subject: RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
Well we did that...but there's no option for default public folder...both systems are
Exchange 2000...
-Original Message-
From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:41 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: public folder replicas and redundancy
Check the properties of the storage group and see where the default public folder is
located.
John Matteson
Geac Corporate ISS
(404) 239 - 2981
Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Berthiaume [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:01 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: public folder replicas and redundancy
2 Exchange servers. Exchange 2000 sp3, Windows 2000 SP3.
Started out with one Exchange server, ServerA. ServerA contains a complete copy of the
public store as well as the mailbox store. ServerB was brought online a short time ago
because ServerA is running low on disk space and horsepower, so weâre hoping to move
to ServerB.
Using System Manager I configured all our public folders to replicate to ServerB. I
thought that this would mean that ServerB would then carry the load of public folder
requests, should the public store on ServerA not be available. This however doesnât
appear to be the case. If I dismount the public store on ServerA, and then try to
access the public folders, I get an angry âunable to display the folder
(ServerA).â
Does ServerA need to be turned off altogether for B to answer requests for the public
folders? Or is there just something I missed somewhere in setting this up. I know in
Exchange 5.5 there was the concept of folder âhomingâ but thatâs gone now
isnât it? All I did was use ESM to go to the top level public folders, set up the
replication, and then propagated it down. The pub store size on ServerB is indeed
large, suggesting that all the data is thereâ¦but itâs just not answering the
bellâ¦
Thanks I advance.
.+--xm
,)r(ື \æªb=!6
0
à§zÇ1r,:.Ë
mé[hy\z[,)rÉZ Zvh'+-iÙ¢2 G(
.rzrmyzrÅvi
.+--xm
,)r(ື \æªb=!6
0
à§zÇ1r,:.Ë
mé[hy\z[,)rÉZ Zvh'+-iÙ¢2 G(
.rzrmyzrÅvi
.+--xm
,)r(ື \æªb=!6
0
à§zÇ1r,:.Ë
mé[hy\z[,)rÉZ Zvh'+-iÙ¢2 G(
.+x
)r뺷ÙȽ
zÇȱr:˱m[yì
©z[)rÈ
vh+iÙÌG
Ëi¢Ëb@Bm§ÿðà 0w ¢oëzÊ.Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ÿÃ
,Ã)är¿²+^±æ«r ìyªÜ
«)N§²æìr¸zf¢Ú%y«Þ{!jx Ë0Êy ¢a1r§ââ²Ö)åËZvh§³ §Ê
public folder replication
Is there a way to specify replication for the ENTIRE public folder store? I want to replicate the whole public folder store from one server, to another, and I'd like to avoid going through each public folder on the first server (100) and specifying it for replication. Exchange 2000 SP3 on both systems... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MIME and Exchange
Here's the story. We have essentially 2 systems...legacy system running PMDF mail, and the Windows end running Exchange 2000. Users frequently send messages, with attachments(simple text files) or bodies full of text(plain...fixed width), from the legacy end, via PMDF 6.11, to the Exchange Server ( Windows 2000 sp2, exchange sp2) and the messages are read with a mix of Outlook 2000 - 2002. Recently, some of these mails have not been reaching users inbox in Outlook. PMDF logs show that the message was sent, but no acknowledgment was received from Exchange, so PMDF marks it as a failure, and backs off and tries again later. SMTP logs on the Exchange Server show EHLO, MAIL, RCPT commands but no DATA or QUIT commands as a successful SMTP conversation would. Playing around with it some more resulted in some more data...it's possible to force PMDF to send the attachment as different MIME parts. If the attachment comes across as the 2nd MIME part it gets delivered on Exchange with no problem...but if it's included as the 1st MIME part, it doesn't come through. Note that the message isn't long...it just has a lot of columns.(224) sometimes with characters and things like tabs, *, - or ~'s. If we send just a short message, and short attachment, in the first MIME part, it comes across...thus leading me to believe that there's some kind of byte limitation in the first MIME part. PMDF support, and the PMDF admin here thinks it's Exchange...that it's in violation of some MIME RFC...I don't know. I can grab one of the files that won't come over and send it to Exchange from Yahoo, Hotmail, or AOL (yuck) and it comes over without a problem...I know that most mail services embed the attachments in the 2nd MIME part, but I think that's because even if you don't include any body text, they stick in that dumb advertising in the body of the message, thus forcing the attachment into MIME part #2. They are telling me to call PSS about this...but I hesitate to do so because stuff like this inevitably winds up being a PMDF screw up or misconfiguration (in case you haven't figured it out by now, I hate PMDF). Latest version of Trend Scanmail for Exchange 2000 is installed and running on the Exchange 2000 box. Thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MIME and Exchange
Thanks Greg. I suspect you are right in so much as PMDF is mangling the message somehow. I'm not sure what the latest and greatest method of integrating Exchange and PMDF is...especially since after that Q was written, PMDF was dropped by Innosoft and picked up by Process Software (the same guys that support MultiNet, another pain in my side but we won't get into that now) -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 4:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: MIME and Exchange Well, I think that you are correct in being skeptical of PMDF. First, as identified in the following Q-article, Innosoft does not appear to even support this configuration. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;Q185107; Innosoft recommends connecting to Exchange via X.400, not SMTP and SMTP connectivity to Exchange is not recommended or supported (unless something has changed since this Q-article.) I would be willing to bet that the issue that you are experiencing is very similar in nature to the issues in the Q-article. It likely is some issue with the PDMF client or gateway not properly formatting the MIME message. Let me know if any of this is helpful or if you need some additional information. The simple fact that Innosoft does not support your configuration is a pretty damning evidence to the fact that PMDF is at fault. Here's the story. We have essentially 2 systems...legacy system running PMDF mail, and the Windows end running Exchange 2000. Users frequently send messages, with attachments(simple text files) or bodies full of text(plain...fixed width), from the legacy end, via PMDF 6.11, to the Exchange Server ( Windows 2000 sp2, exchange sp2) and the messages are read with a mix of Outlook 2000 - 2002.=20 Recently, some of these mails have not been reaching users inbox in Outlook. PMDF logs show that the message was sent, but no acknowledgment was received from Exchange, so PMDF marks it as a failure, and backs off and tries again later. SMTP logs on the Exchange Server show EHLO, MAIL, RCPT commands but no DATA or QUIT commands as a successful SMTP conversation would. Playing around with it some more resulted in some more data...it's possible to force PMDF to send the attachment as different MIME parts. If the attachment comes across as the 2nd MIME part it gets delivered on Exchange with no problem...but if it's included as the 1st MIME part, it doesn't come through. Note that the message isn't long...it just has a lot of columns.(224) sometimes with characters and things like tabs, *, - or ~'s. If we send just a short message, and short attachment, in the first MIME part, it comes across...thus leading me to believe that there's some kind of byte limitation in the first MIME part. PMDF support, and the PMDF admin here thinks it's Exchange...that it's in violation of some MIME RFC...I don't know. I can grab one of the files that won't come over and send it to Exchange from Yahoo, Hotmail, or AOL (yuck) and it comes over without a problem...I know that most mail services embed the attachments in the 2nd MIME part, but I think that's because even if you don't include any body text, they stick in that dumb advertising in the body of the message, thus forcing the attachment into MIME part #2. They are telling me to call PSS about this...but I hesitate to do so because stuff like this inevitably winds up being a PMDF screw up or misconfiguration (in case you haven't figured it out by now, I hate PMDF). Latest version of Trend Scanmail for Exchange 2000 is installed and running on the Exchange 2000 box.=20 Thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MIME and Exchange
Andrey- This is an interesting point...i've forwarded it on to the PMDF guys...the only question I have is, if the encoding were screwed up, why are only certain files/mail messages getting hung up? -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 4:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MIME and Exchange If there is no DATA command, how does Exchange ever know that the data will be MIME or something else? I think there is something else going on there like different character sets or 7-bit vs 8-bit encoding. Also is there any way to force that PRDL system to send messages in UUENCODE? -Original Message- From: Joe Berthiaume [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 3:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MIME and Exchange Here's the story. We have essentially 2 systems...legacy system running PMDF mail, and the Windows end running Exchange 2000. Users frequently send messages, with attachments(simple text files) or bodies full of text(plain...fixed width), from the legacy end, via PMDF 6.11, to the Exchange Server ( Windows 2000 sp2, exchange sp2) and the messages are read with a mix of Outlook 2000 - 2002. Recently, some of these mails have not been reaching users inbox in Outlook. PMDF logs show that the message was sent, but no acknowledgment was received from Exchange, so PMDF marks it as a failure, and backs off and tries again later. SMTP logs on the Exchange Server show EHLO, MAIL, RCPT commands but no DATA or QUIT commands as a successful SMTP conversation would. Playing around with it some more resulted in some more data...it's possible to force PMDF to send the attachment as different MIME parts. If the attachment comes across as the 2nd MIME part it gets delivered on Exchange with no problem...but if it's included as the 1st MIME part, it doesn't come through. Note that the message isn't long...it just has a lot of columns.(224) sometimes with characters and things like tabs, *, - or ~'s. If we send just a short message, and short attachment, in the first MIME part, it comes across...thus leading me to believe that there's some kind of byte limitation in the first MIME part. PMDF support, and the PMDF admin here thinks it's Exchange...that it's in violation of some MIME RFC...I don't know. I can grab one of the files that won't come over and send it to Exchange from Yahoo, Hotmail, or AOL (yuck) and it comes over without a problem...I know that most mail services embed the attachments in the 2nd MIME part, but I think that's because even if you don't include any body text, they stick in that dumb advertising in the body of the message, thus forcing the attachment into MIME part #2. They are telling me to call PSS about this...but I hesitate to do so because stuff like this inevitably winds up being a PMDF screw up or misconfiguration (in case you haven't figured it out by now, I hate PMDF). Latest version of Trend Scanmail for Exchange 2000 is installed and running on the Exchange 2000 box. Thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: XP on 2000 Network
username@domain password -Original Message- From: HANNA, Keith (TSL Shirley) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: XP on 2000 Network format is: domain\username password -Original Message- From: Rob Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 28 February 2002 15:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: XP on 2000 Network Hello everybody-- We have a native Windows 2000 (SP2) network, with an Exchange 2000 (SP2) server. When they connect to OWA from home, using IE 5.5 or 6 on a Windows 98 or 2000 box, they get three boxes to fill in: Username, Password, Domain. I have two users who have Windows XP computers at home, and when they connect to our OWA site, using IE 6, they only get two boxes to fill in: Username and Password. No Domain. So they can't get in. Is there a remedy or workaround so it will work for them? Thanks, Rob -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Robert Moore, MCSE Network Administrator The Agnes Irwin School [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Workflow Development / vbScript
Working on what I thought was a fairly straight forward workflow application. Exchange 2000, Outlook 2000/2002. Using Office XP Developer to build the application. Basically what happens is that an email enters an Exchange public folder from the Internet. This triggers workflow processes to begin, the first step of which is where I am stuck. I need to get at the subject and body of that mail message, and use it to populate a custom form, which then becomes the center point of the workflow app - the buck gets passed around the company, all through workflow states and transitions. The body of the mail message already conforms to a set pattern, (it's built through an HTML form ... and very thoroughly validated) so it will be easy to parse it by CRLF, tabs etc. in order to populate the fields on the custom form. The problem is that first part...getting at the subject and body of the original message. I've read through MSDN online and half a dozen different books, and I just can't seem to find what I am looking for. I figure the WorkflowSession object is involved, because I can invoke that to get the FROM field out of the original message...but not the body. I have a feeling the solution is really simple... I just can't put my finger on it... Thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
