RE: What ports to open
80, 443 I think? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of rsamman Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 2:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: What ports to open My OWA is working from within ( locally ), but I can't access it from home What ports do I need open to have it working Thanks _ 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] _ 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]
Silly Outlook Addressing Problem
OK, I'm sure this is a newbie question, but I don't even know what to call this problem in order to look it up: After our upgrade to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 many of our users are experiencing a problem where they are getting undeliverable emails to other staff members. This is definitely a problem with the X400 addresses, since they have changed and the SMTP addresses have not (and in fact, when looking at their sent item I can see the old X400 address from the 5.5 system is still in there). So, I surmise that the problem has to do with how Outlook holds on to past email addresses. My guess is that the users are responding to old emails that came from users back when the old system was in place and are therefore getting the old X400 addresses. This is sticking in Outlook's cache (again, note that I'm not an Outlook expert) and causing problems when they then attempt to send to that user again. So, two possible related solutions: 1. get rid of the X400 addresses if they are not necessary. We have only one Exchange server and are not likely to get another. Do we really need them? 2. Figure out how to turn off Outlook's caching of email addresses. How does one do that? Is there a way to do it via Active Directory GPO's? Thanks for any help, Matt _ 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]
SMTP Addresses
This might be a silly newbie question, but how does one go about setting a default set of addresses in Exchange 2000 that will update all the user accounts with something other than just [EMAIL PROTECTED] For example, I already have it set so that all users have addresses at @heightslibrary.org and at @chuhpl.lib.oh.us. But the required addresses from our consortium also include needing the user name part of be the following formats: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] The second of these is easy... It's just the alias, but how can I set something up to format the addresses using the first and last names? Basically I'd like to avoid having to do it individually for all my users. I know the update service will take care of populating these accounts with the addresses, I just need to have the system recognize how I want the addresses formatted. Thanks, Matt _ 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: SMTP Addresses
Ah, perfect! That is exactly what I was looking for. Unfortunately, the help does not appear to contain that info in a conveniently logical place. Thanks! Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fyodorov, Andrey Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 2:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SMTP Addresses You can use the %g and %s strings. %g is given name. %s is surname. So [EMAIL PROTECTED] will be generating e-mail addresses with the [EMAIL PROTECTED] format. Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 12:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SMTP Addresses This might be a silly newbie question, but how does one go about setting a default set of addresses in Exchange 2000 that will update all the user accounts with something other than just [EMAIL PROTECTED] For example, I already have it set so that all users have addresses at @heightslibrary.org and at @chuhpl.lib.oh.us. But the required addresses from our consortium also include needing the user name part of be the following formats: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] The second of these is easy... It's just the alias, but how can I set something up to format the addresses using the first and last names? Basically I'd like to avoid having to do it individually for all my users. I know the update service will take care of populating these accounts with the addresses, I just need to have the system recognize how I want the addresses formatted. Thanks, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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]
Problems with IIS settings for Exchange and Public in Exchange 2000
Having a strange problem here where IIS won't hold on to the folder security settings we want in place for our users. We've changed them to Basic Authentication for the Exchange site, and Anonymous for the Public site. Any time the server is rebooted it loses these settings and goes back to the defaults that came with Exchange. Additionally, it seems to lose track of the paths for these sites, that is, the path is there in the settings correctly, and the path itself does exist (the M: drive), but IIS thinks that the path does NOT exist (red Error icon exists in IIS Manager) until you go in and browse to the path and then it finds it. Has anyone run into this before? Thanks, Matt _ 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: Problems with IIS settings for Exchange and Public in Exchange 2000
Thanks for the note on this. It made me delve deeper into the Exchange System Manager. You get a message to use the IIS manager for dealing with the OWA pages, but then if you click further down you can actually define the settings in the ESM. Frankly, it's a confusing message that I have a hard time believing doesn't trip up a lot of people... Maybe it's just me. Oh well. Thanks for all the help, it looks like its working now! Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neil Hobson Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Problems with IIS settings for Exchange and Public in Exchange 2000 Make sure you make the changes in Exchange System Manager, and not IIS Manager, otherwise they'll be overwritten by a sub-process of the System Attendant called DS2MB. As for the red icons, that's a benign error: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=259373 Neil -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: 13 October 2003 15:11 Posted To: Swynk Exchange (30 days) Conversation: Problems with IIS settings for Exchange and Public in Exchange 2000 Subject: Problems with IIS settings for Exchange and Public in Exchange 2000 Having a strange problem here where IIS won't hold on to the folder security settings we want in place for our users. We've changed them to Basic Authentication for the Exchange site, and Anonymous for the Public site. Any time the server is rebooted it loses these settings and goes back to the defaults that came with Exchange. Additionally, it seems to lose track of the paths for these sites, that is, the path is there in the settings correctly, and the path itself does exist (the M: drive), but IIS thinks that the path does NOT exist (red Error icon exists in IIS Manager) until you go in and browse to the path and then it finds it. Has anyone run into this before? Thanks, Matt _ 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] __ This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately on 01202 360360 or email [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silversands.co.uk _ 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] _ 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: users no longer exist - what to do with their mail?
Doesn't Exchange bounce back any type of message to the originator of the message that the account no longer exists, though? Or really, maybe I should say shouldn't it? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fyodorov, Andrey Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 12:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: users no longer exist - what to do with their mail? Create an empty DL and add all the non-existent users' SMTP addresses to the DL's e-mail addresses. -Original Message- From: Louanne Fournier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 12:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: users no longer exist - what to do with their mail? Our head office recently laid off a couple of hundred people. I get mail for these people every day and my server is spending a lot of time sending NDR to the senders. Can anyone suggest a good method for handling email coming in to non-existent users? Louanne [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
I just managed to restore via the remote backup. I kept getting errors in the event log but eventually one of them led me to a knowledgebase article that mentioned needing to have NetBIOS over TCP/IP turned on on the servers. Having done that then it worked. However, the Information Store won't start afterward, even with a reboot of the restored server. I'm currently looking through some knowledgebase articles to see if I can figure anything out... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition No. Is this an online backup? Simply re-direct the info store restore to the recovery 5.5 server. You don't need to restore the directory to get at the mailboxes. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Hmmm... One more thing... Does the server I'm restoring to require the same name as the old server? Not just the same org and site? Matt -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition I believe I'll need the log files won't I? The restore doesn't work just as-is. Man, I hope my backup guy did his job here... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Can you see the 5.5 server in NTBACKUP on the server with the Admin Gui on it? Otherwise, slap the tape drive on the 5.5 member server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Argh! Trying this IS making my head hurt. I installed to another member server in the same domain as my current Exchange 2000 server. So, both are in an Active Directory domain. I get the same thing with the 5.5 management console... It just can't find the 5.5 server. I was used to seeing this just connect with no problem previously when I had two 5.5 servers going at once. So, what 's the problem here? Some service I didn't install, something I haven't configured correctly? I'm getting no luck in Microsoft's knowledgebase. This is just a basic install following the instructions Andy gave here... Same org and site as the old server. I installed just the server itself and the management console, and installed it as a non multi-site server. I have no idea if that's the problem. I wouldn't think it would be. Any clue as to why the management console on another server will not pick up this 5.5 server?? Thanks, Matt -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Mongo head hurt. You should be able to setup a new 5.5 server on a member server. Just make sure its got the same OS and Exchange SPs as the original production 5.5 server. Create a new site and org, using the exact same org and site name as the orig 5.5 server. Restore only the info store, pop out those mailboxes to psts and import them into the new server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Gah! Sorry about hijacking that thread... OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160 did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes and lost a whole lot of data here. I still have my backups from 5.5, but the question is, how the hell do I get any of it back now? The tape drive that was used for those backups was on the same server that is now 2000, and is now in AD where it was in an NT 4 domain before. I tried installing 5.5 on another server and the 5.5 management tools on the upgraded box. Normally that means one can see the existing 5.5 servers and restore or backup data to them remotely. However, the 5.5 management tools cannot see the other server that 5.5 is now installed to. It's in the old domain, whereas the new box is in the new AD domain. Is this the problem? Should I install 5.5 somewhere in my AD domain and try restoring there? Is this a common problem with the 5.5 management tools that they can't go cross-domain to see 5.5 server? I guess any kind of help here would be great since my 15 lost users are having major panic attacks. Thanks, Matt
RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
Actually, I tried all of those... Isinteg... Esutil... And changing the restore in progress setting... One thing I saw said to delete that registry key. Nothing so far has worked... At this point the problem now appears to be that the Directory Service won't start, but the system says it is failing with no errors. So, I'm uninstalling 5.5 and will reinstall and then restore again. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 10:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition did you run isinteg with the patch option? Also what was the exact error message you get in the event log. Search on that as it may have to do with changing the restore in progress setting. From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:59:24 -0400 I just managed to restore via the remote backup. I kept getting errors in the event log but eventually one of them led me to a knowledgebase article that mentioned needing to have NetBIOS over TCP/IP turned on on the servers. Having done that then it worked. However, the Information Store won't start afterward, even with a reboot of the restored server. I'm currently looking through some knowledgebase articles to see if I can figure anything out... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition No. Is this an online backup? Simply re-direct the info store restore to the recovery 5.5 server. You don't need to restore the directory to get at the mailboxes. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Hmmm... One more thing... Does the server I'm restoring to require the same name as the old server? Not just the same org and site? Matt -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition I believe I'll need the log files won't I? The restore doesn't work just as-is. Man, I hope my backup guy did his job here... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Can you see the 5.5 server in NTBACKUP on the server with the Admin Gui on it? Otherwise, slap the tape drive on the 5.5 member server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Argh! Trying this IS making my head hurt. I installed to another member server in the same domain as my current Exchange 2000 server. So, both are in an Active Directory domain. I get the same thing with the 5.5 management console... It just can't find the 5.5 server. I was used to seeing this just connect with no problem previously when I had two 5.5 servers going at once. So, what 's the problem here? Some service I didn't install, something I haven't configured correctly? I'm getting no luck in Microsoft's knowledgebase. This is just a basic install following the instructions Andy gave here... Same org and site as the old server. I installed just the server itself and the management console, and installed it as a non multi-site server. I have no idea if that's the problem. I wouldn't think it would be. Any clue as to why the management console on another server will not pick up this 5.5 server?? Thanks, Matt -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Mongo head hurt. You should be able to setup a new 5.5 server on a member server. Just make sure its got the same OS and Exchange SPs as the original production 5.5 server. Create a new site and org, using the exact same org and site name as the orig 5.5 server. Restore only the info store, pop out those mailboxes to psts and import them into the new server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Gah! Sorry about hijacking that thread... OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160 did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes and lost a whole lot of data here. I still have my
RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
It's an online restore, and was an online full backup. I've been following the Whitepaper as noted in another post. I've had this sucker for a while, but since things didn't seem to be working as described, I needed the information you guys could provide. I've been hacking at this for a while now, just trying anything I could from the Knowledgebase or other sources to see what would or wouldn't work. At this point I think my best bet is to start over from the beginning of the restore process and make sure I didn't miss a step. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Is this an online or offline restore? - Original Message - From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:11 AM Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Actually, I tried all of those... Isinteg... Esutil... And changing the restore in progress setting... One thing I saw said to delete that registry key. Nothing so far has worked... At this point the problem now appears to be that the Directory Service won't start, but the system says it is failing with no errors. So, I'm uninstalling 5.5 and will reinstall and then restore again. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 10:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition did you run isinteg with the patch option? Also what was the exact error message you get in the event log. Search on that as it may have to do with changing the restore in progress setting. From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:59:24 -0400 I just managed to restore via the remote backup. I kept getting errors in the event log but eventually one of them led me to a knowledgebase article that mentioned needing to have NetBIOS over TCP/IP turned on on the servers. Having done that then it worked. However, the Information Store won't start afterward, even with a reboot of the restored server. I'm currently looking through some knowledgebase articles to see if I can figure anything out... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition No. Is this an online backup? Simply re-direct the info store restore to the recovery 5.5 server. You don't need to restore the directory to get at the mailboxes. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Hmmm... One more thing... Does the server I'm restoring to require the same name as the old server? Not just the same org and site? Matt -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition I believe I'll need the log files won't I? The restore doesn't work just as-is. Man, I hope my backup guy did his job here... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Can you see the 5.5 server in NTBACKUP on the server with the Admin Gui on it? Otherwise, slap the tape drive on the 5.5 member server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Argh! Trying this IS making my head hurt. I installed to another member server in the same domain as my current Exchange 2000 server. So, both are in an Active Directory domain. I get the same thing with the 5.5 management console... It just can't find the 5.5 server. I was used to seeing this just connect with no problem previously when I had two 5.5 servers going at once. So, what 's the problem here? Some service I didn't install, something I haven't configured correctly? I'm getting no luck in Microsoft's knowledgebase. This is just a basic install following the instructions Andy gave here... Same org and site as the old server. I installed just the server itself and the management console, and installed it as a non multi-site server. I have no idea if that's the problem. I wouldn't think it would be. Any clue as to why the management console on another server will not pick up this 5.5 server?? Thanks, Matt -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Mongo
RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
Yup. That's what I'm using. I only tried those other utils based on articles that I had read after the original procedure had not worked. This is, and should be, a relatively simple process, especially since we did normal, rather than differential, backups. But I must have screwed something up the first time (I had also just worked 13 straight hours with no break). We'll see about it this time. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Be sure to restore only the Info Store, not the directory. Redirect it to the recovery server. *Do not* run any utilities on the database. Let it try to start on its own. With an online restore, there is no need to run isinteg and the only time you should have to run eseutil is if you screwed up and the recovery server's OS and SP level do not match the production's OS and SP level. In the DR whitepaper, use the section that refers to Single Mailbox Recovery and you should be good to go. - Original Message - From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:31 AM Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition It's an online restore, and was an online full backup. I've been following the Whitepaper as noted in another post. I've had this sucker for a while, but since things didn't seem to be working as described, I needed the information you guys could provide. I've been hacking at this for a while now, just trying anything I could from the Knowledgebase or other sources to see what would or wouldn't work. At this point I think my best bet is to start over from the beginning of the restore process and make sure I didn't miss a step. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Is this an online or offline restore? - Original Message - From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:11 AM Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Actually, I tried all of those... Isinteg... Esutil... And changing the restore in progress setting... One thing I saw said to delete that registry key. Nothing so far has worked... At this point the problem now appears to be that the Directory Service won't start, but the system says it is failing with no errors. So, I'm uninstalling 5.5 and will reinstall and then restore again. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 10:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition did you run isinteg with the patch option? Also what was the exact error message you get in the event log. Search on that as it may have to do with changing the restore in progress setting. From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:59:24 -0400 I just managed to restore via the remote backup. I kept getting errors in the event log but eventually one of them led me to a knowledgebase article that mentioned needing to have NetBIOS over TCP/IP turned on on the servers. Having done that then it worked. However, the Information Store won't start afterward, even with a reboot of the restored server. I'm currently looking through some knowledgebase articles to see if I can figure anything out... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition No. Is this an online backup? Simply re-direct the info store restore to the recovery 5.5 server. You don't need to restore the directory to get at the mailboxes. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Hmmm... One more thing... Does the server I'm restoring to require the same name as the old server? Not just the same org and site? Matt -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition I believe I'll need the log files won't I? The restore doesn't work just as-is. Man, I hope my backup guy did his job here... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Can you see the 5.5 server in NTBACKUP on the server with the Admin Gui on it? Otherwise, slap the tape drive on the 5.5 member server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
OK, this is pretty stupid. I had everything else right... But here's the kicker: my assistant recently upgraded the restore server to W2K SP4. The original 5.5 server was W2K SP3. That was it right there, and I didn't bother to check because, at least in my mind, we hadn't upgraded any of our W2K servers yet. So, we're back up and running and all our users have their email. Thanks to all who helped me out with this, and sorry for any wasted time on your parts. Matt -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Yup. That's what I'm using. I only tried those other utils based on articles that I had read after the original procedure had not worked. This is, and should be, a relatively simple process, especially since we did normal, rather than differential, backups. But I must have screwed something up the first time (I had also just worked 13 straight hours with no break). We'll see about it this time. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Be sure to restore only the Info Store, not the directory. Redirect it to the recovery server. *Do not* run any utilities on the database. Let it try to start on its own. With an online restore, there is no need to run isinteg and the only time you should have to run eseutil is if you screwed up and the recovery server's OS and SP level do not match the production's OS and SP level. In the DR whitepaper, use the section that refers to Single Mailbox Recovery and you should be good to go. - Original Message - From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:31 AM Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition It's an online restore, and was an online full backup. I've been following the Whitepaper as noted in another post. I've had this sucker for a while, but since things didn't seem to be working as described, I needed the information you guys could provide. I've been hacking at this for a while now, just trying anything I could from the Knowledgebase or other sources to see what would or wouldn't work. At this point I think my best bet is to start over from the beginning of the restore process and make sure I didn't miss a step. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Is this an online or offline restore? - Original Message - From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:11 AM Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Actually, I tried all of those... Isinteg... Esutil... And changing the restore in progress setting... One thing I saw said to delete that registry key. Nothing so far has worked... At this point the problem now appears to be that the Directory Service won't start, but the system says it is failing with no errors. So, I'm uninstalling 5.5 and will reinstall and then restore again. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 10:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition did you run isinteg with the patch option? Also what was the exact error message you get in the event log. Search on that as it may have to do with changing the restore in progress setting. From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:59:24 -0400 I just managed to restore via the remote backup. I kept getting errors in the event log but eventually one of them led me to a knowledgebase article that mentioned needing to have NetBIOS over TCP/IP turned on on the servers. Having done that then it worked. However, the Information Store won't start afterward, even with a reboot of the restored server. I'm currently looking through some knowledgebase articles to see if I can figure anything out... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition No. Is this an online backup? Simply re-direct the info store restore to the recovery 5.5 server. You don't need to restore the directory to get at the mailboxes. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Hmmm... One more thing... Does the server I'm restoring to require the same name as the old server? Not just the same org and site? Matt -Original Message- From
RE: Exchange 2003 RBL
OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160 did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes and lost a whole lot of data here. I still have my backups from 5.5, but the question is, how the hell do I get any of it back now? The tape drive that was used for those backups was on the same server that is now 2000, and is now in AD where it was in an NT 4 domain before. I tried installing 5.5 on another server and the 5.5 management tools on the upgraded box. Normally that means one can see the existing 5.5 servers and restore or backup data to them remotely. However, the 5.5 management tools cannot see the other server that 5.5 is now installed to. It's in the old domain, whereas the new box is in the new AD domain. Is this the problem? Should I install 5.5 somewhere in my AD domain and try restoring there? Is this a common problem with the 5.5 management tools that they can't go cross-domain to see 5.5 server? I guess any kind of help here would be great since my 15 lost users are having major panic attacks. Thanks, Matt _ 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]
5.5 to 2000 Transition
Gah! Sorry about hijacking that thread... OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160 did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes and lost a whole lot of data here. I still have my backups from 5.5, but the question is, how the hell do I get any of it back now? The tape drive that was used for those backups was on the same server that is now 2000, and is now in AD where it was in an NT 4 domain before. I tried installing 5.5 on another server and the 5.5 management tools on the upgraded box. Normally that means one can see the existing 5.5 servers and restore or backup data to them remotely. However, the 5.5 management tools cannot see the other server that 5.5 is now installed to. It's in the old domain, whereas the new box is in the new AD domain. Is this the problem? Should I install 5.5 somewhere in my AD domain and try restoring there? Is this a common problem with the 5.5 management tools that they can't go cross-domain to see 5.5 server? I guess any kind of help here would be great since my 15 lost users are having major panic attacks. Thanks, Matt _ 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] _ 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: Exchange 2003 RBL
Sorry about that. I was a bit flustered at the time and didn't realize I had done so. You'll note that I did post the same message with a different subject afterward... Matt -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 RBL Matt, What does this have to do with the thread in place? Perhaps if you want help you need to send a new e-mail so that a new thread starts (or continue the thread this started on)?? I know those that will want to help will find it easier if this is the case. My $0.02 (inc GST). themolk. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 25 September 2003 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 RBL OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160 did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes and lost a whole lot of data here. I still have my backups from 5.5, but the question is, how the hell do I get any of it back now? The tape drive that was used for those backups was on the same server that is now 2000, and is now in AD where it was in an NT 4 domain before. I tried installing 5.5 on another server and the 5.5 management tools on the upgraded box. Normally that means one can see the existing 5.5 servers and restore or backup data to them remotely. However, the 5.5 management tools cannot see the other server that 5.5 is now installed to. It's in the old domain, whereas the new box is in the new AD domain. Is this the problem? Should I install 5.5 somewhere in my AD domain and try restoring there? Is this a common problem with the 5.5 management tools that they can't go cross-domain to see 5.5 server? I guess any kind of help here would be great since my 15 lost users are having major panic attacks. Thanks, Matt _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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] _ 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: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
Argh! Trying this IS making my head hurt. I installed to another member server in the same domain as my current Exchange 2000 server. So, both are in an Active Directory domain. I get the same thing with the 5.5 management console... It just can't find the 5.5 server. I was used to seeing this just connect with no problem previously when I had two 5.5 servers going at once. So, what 's the problem here? Some service I didn't install, something I haven't configured correctly? I'm getting no luck in Microsoft's knowledgebase. This is just a basic install following the instructions Andy gave here... Same org and site as the old server. I installed just the server itself and the management console, and installed it as a non multi-site server. I have no idea if that's the problem. I wouldn't think it would be. Any clue as to why the management console on another server will not pick up this 5.5 server?? Thanks, Matt -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Mongo head hurt. You should be able to setup a new 5.5 server on a member server. Just make sure its got the same OS and Exchange SPs as the original production 5.5 server. Create a new site and org, using the exact same org and site name as the orig 5.5 server. Restore only the info store, pop out those mailboxes to psts and import them into the new server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Gah! Sorry about hijacking that thread... OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160 did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes and lost a whole lot of data here. I still have my backups from 5.5, but the question is, how the hell do I get any of it back now? The tape drive that was used for those backups was on the same server that is now 2000, and is now in AD where it was in an NT 4 domain before. I tried installing 5.5 on another server and the 5.5 management tools on the upgraded box. Normally that means one can see the existing 5.5 servers and restore or backup data to them remotely. However, the 5.5 management tools cannot see the other server that 5.5 is now installed to. It's in the old domain, whereas the new box is in the new AD domain. Is this the problem? Should I install 5.5 somewhere in my AD domain and try restoring there? Is this a common problem with the 5.5 management tools that they can't go cross-domain to see 5.5 server? I guess any kind of help here would be great since my 15 lost users are having major panic attacks. Thanks, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
Andy, Just now I am able to see the server through management console and NTBACKUP. Restarting the services may have done it. I'm attempting to restore at this point... I was able to point it to the new 5.5 server once I set it to erase everything that was already there. I've got my fingers crossed... I'd really like to go home! Matt -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Can you see the 5.5 server in NTBACKUP on the server with the Admin Gui on it? Otherwise, slap the tape drive on the 5.5 member server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Argh! Trying this IS making my head hurt. I installed to another member server in the same domain as my current Exchange 2000 server. So, both are in an Active Directory domain. I get the same thing with the 5.5 management console... It just can't find the 5.5 server. I was used to seeing this just connect with no problem previously when I had two 5.5 servers going at once. So, what 's the problem here? Some service I didn't install, something I haven't configured correctly? I'm getting no luck in Microsoft's knowledgebase. This is just a basic install following the instructions Andy gave here... Same org and site as the old server. I installed just the server itself and the management console, and installed it as a non multi-site server. I have no idea if that's the problem. I wouldn't think it would be. Any clue as to why the management console on another server will not pick up this 5.5 server?? Thanks, Matt -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Mongo head hurt. You should be able to setup a new 5.5 server on a member server. Just make sure its got the same OS and Exchange SPs as the original production 5.5 server. Create a new site and org, using the exact same org and site name as the orig 5.5 server. Restore only the info store, pop out those mailboxes to psts and import them into the new server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Gah! Sorry about hijacking that thread... OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160 did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes and lost a whole lot of data here. I still have my backups from 5.5, but the question is, how the hell do I get any of it back now? The tape drive that was used for those backups was on the same server that is now 2000, and is now in AD where it was in an NT 4 domain before. I tried installing 5.5 on another server and the 5.5 management tools on the upgraded box. Normally that means one can see the existing 5.5 servers and restore or backup data to them remotely. However, the 5.5 management tools cannot see the other server that 5.5 is now installed to. It's in the old domain, whereas the new box is in the new AD domain. Is this the problem? Should I install 5.5 somewhere in my AD domain and try restoring there? Is this a common problem with the 5.5 management tools that they can't go cross-domain to see 5.5 server? I guess any kind of help here would be great since my 15 lost users are having major panic attacks. Thanks, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm
RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
I believe I'll need the log files won't I? The restore doesn't work just as-is. Man, I hope my backup guy did his job here... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Can you see the 5.5 server in NTBACKUP on the server with the Admin Gui on it? Otherwise, slap the tape drive on the 5.5 member server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Argh! Trying this IS making my head hurt. I installed to another member server in the same domain as my current Exchange 2000 server. So, both are in an Active Directory domain. I get the same thing with the 5.5 management console... It just can't find the 5.5 server. I was used to seeing this just connect with no problem previously when I had two 5.5 servers going at once. So, what 's the problem here? Some service I didn't install, something I haven't configured correctly? I'm getting no luck in Microsoft's knowledgebase. This is just a basic install following the instructions Andy gave here... Same org and site as the old server. I installed just the server itself and the management console, and installed it as a non multi-site server. I have no idea if that's the problem. I wouldn't think it would be. Any clue as to why the management console on another server will not pick up this 5.5 server?? Thanks, Matt -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Mongo head hurt. You should be able to setup a new 5.5 server on a member server. Just make sure its got the same OS and Exchange SPs as the original production 5.5 server. Create a new site and org, using the exact same org and site name as the orig 5.5 server. Restore only the info store, pop out those mailboxes to psts and import them into the new server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Gah! Sorry about hijacking that thread... OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160 did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes and lost a whole lot of data here. I still have my backups from 5.5, but the question is, how the hell do I get any of it back now? The tape drive that was used for those backups was on the same server that is now 2000, and is now in AD where it was in an NT 4 domain before. I tried installing 5.5 on another server and the 5.5 management tools on the upgraded box. Normally that means one can see the existing 5.5 servers and restore or backup data to them remotely. However, the 5.5 management tools cannot see the other server that 5.5 is now installed to. It's in the old domain, whereas the new box is in the new AD domain. Is this the problem? Should I install 5.5 somewhere in my AD domain and try restoring there? Is this a common problem with the 5.5 management tools that they can't go cross-domain to see 5.5 server? I guess any kind of help here would be great since my 15 lost users are having major panic attacks. Thanks, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
Hmmm... One more thing... Does the server I'm restoring to require the same name as the old server? Not just the same org and site? Matt -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition I believe I'll need the log files won't I? The restore doesn't work just as-is. Man, I hope my backup guy did his job here... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Can you see the 5.5 server in NTBACKUP on the server with the Admin Gui on it? Otherwise, slap the tape drive on the 5.5 member server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Argh! Trying this IS making my head hurt. I installed to another member server in the same domain as my current Exchange 2000 server. So, both are in an Active Directory domain. I get the same thing with the 5.5 management console... It just can't find the 5.5 server. I was used to seeing this just connect with no problem previously when I had two 5.5 servers going at once. So, what 's the problem here? Some service I didn't install, something I haven't configured correctly? I'm getting no luck in Microsoft's knowledgebase. This is just a basic install following the instructions Andy gave here... Same org and site as the old server. I installed just the server itself and the management console, and installed it as a non multi-site server. I have no idea if that's the problem. I wouldn't think it would be. Any clue as to why the management console on another server will not pick up this 5.5 server?? Thanks, Matt -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Mongo head hurt. You should be able to setup a new 5.5 server on a member server. Just make sure its got the same OS and Exchange SPs as the original production 5.5 server. Create a new site and org, using the exact same org and site name as the orig 5.5 server. Restore only the info store, pop out those mailboxes to psts and import them into the new server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 5.5 to 2000 Transition Gah! Sorry about hijacking that thread... OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160 did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes and lost a whole lot of data here. I still have my backups from 5.5, but the question is, how the hell do I get any of it back now? The tape drive that was used for those backups was on the same server that is now 2000, and is now in AD where it was in an NT 4 domain before. I tried installing 5.5 on another server and the 5.5 management tools on the upgraded box. Normally that means one can see the existing 5.5 servers and restore or backup data to them remotely. However, the 5.5 management tools cannot see the other server that 5.5 is now installed to. It's in the old domain, whereas the new box is in the new AD domain. Is this the problem? Should I install 5.5 somewhere in my AD domain and try restoring there? Is this a common problem with the 5.5 management tools that they can't go cross-domain to see 5.5 server? I guess any kind of help here would be great since my 15 lost users are having major panic attacks. Thanks, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ List posting FAQ
Upgrade from 5.5 to 2000
OK, I'm just about to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 tomorrow. I've installed a secondary copy of Exchange 2000 in my AD domain. The plan was to do a swing upgrade and migrate all users and mailboxes over to the secondary copy of Exchange and then change my add my 5.5 box into the AD domain (it's in an old NT 4.0 domain now) and install Exchange 2000. However, would this be a feasible solution: do a modified swing where you migrate all users over to the secondary server as a backup of sorts for the messages and contacts and so on and then do a straight upgrade to the existing 5.5 server? I've already got all my connector settings and so on as I want them. Is this a good idea? Why or why not? Perhaps this IS the way a swing is supposed to work and I'm just kind of missing the point of this? I've already tested migrating a user over (me) to the secondary server and it worked perfectly (and man oh man is OWA 2K SO much better than the 5.5 version). Thanks in advance for any help or suggestions. Matt _ 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]
Active Directory Connector
Anyone know how (or if) you can fix a situation where the ADC was not installed first before ForestPrep and DomainPrep were run? Basically we cannot get the Public Folders to replicate because there's no ability to set up an intersite connection. Thanks, Matt _ 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]
Active Directory Connector
Anyone know how (or if) you can fix a situation where the ADC was not installed first before ForestPrep and DomainPrep were run? Basically we cannot get the Public Folders to replicate because there's no ability to set up an intersite connection. Thanks, Matt _ 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]
Computer GPO software installation problems
Hello, I keep looking for the solution to this particular problem, but have found no success with Microsoft's knowledgebase or any other site I've looked at. According to all the sources I've read I'm doing it correctly, but here goes; Windows 2000 server SP3, Computer GPO software distribution (doesn't matter what type of MSI file), Windows XP client workstations SP1: software assigned via Computer GPO's does not install. The computer basically behaves as if it's not receiving any information about waiting software install files. Software assigned or published to Users works as expected. The packages are set up with correct permissions to the share for both computers and users, assigned with UNC path names and not local paths, and appropriate accounts are set up to access the GPO in permissions for that GPO. In fact, this is set up with a brand-new OU called BETATEST, where the users or computers get moved into for testing purposes, so Authenticated Users really ought to do the trick, but even specifically assigned computer names do not work. As mentioned earlier, assigned or published User GPO software installs work just fine. Does anyone have a clue about this? I'm absolutely stumped, and cannot find anything specifically weird such as GPO's have been set to block inheritance or computer GPO settings having been turned off. Everything seems clean there. Basically, I would welcome any suggestions as to where to look for problems beyond this point. I really don't want to do all my software assignment through the Users - some stuff really needs to be set up to install at the Computer level. Thanks in advance for any assistance, Matt Hoffman _ 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: ARGH! Computer GPO software installation problems
Argh! Sorry about this, I meant to send it to the NT list. But, of course, if any of you can help... ;) Matt -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 11:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Computer GPO software installation problems Hello, I keep looking for the solution to this particular problem, but have found no success with Microsoft's knowledgebase or any other site I've looked at. According to all the sources I've read I'm doing it correctly, but here goes; Windows 2000 server SP3, Computer GPO software distribution (doesn't matter what type of MSI file), Windows XP client workstations SP1: software assigned via Computer GPO's does not install. The computer basically behaves as if it's not receiving any information about waiting software install files. Software assigned or published to Users works as expected. The packages are set up with correct permissions to the share for both computers and users, assigned with UNC path names and not local paths, and appropriate accounts are set up to access the GPO in permissions for that GPO. In fact, this is set up with a brand-new OU called BETATEST, where the users or computers get moved into for testing purposes, so Authenticated Users really ought to do the trick, but even specifically assigned computer names do not work. As mentioned earlier, assigned or published User GPO software installs work just fine. Does anyone have a clue about this? I'm absolutely stumped, and cannot find anything specifically weird such as GPO's have been set to block inheritance or computer GPO settings having been turned off. Everything seems clean there. Basically, I would welcome any suggestions as to where to look for problems beyond this point. I really don't want to do all my software assignment through the Users - some stuff really needs to be set up to install at the Computer level. Thanks in advance for any assistance, Matt Hoffman _ 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] _ 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: Deckler wrote a book?!?
I want to know who I can call to make sure I'm getting my proper kickbacks. That's money I'm losing out on Deckler! Matt -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 1:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!? Same old bag of gas. IT consultants are all unprofessional except for me. Ed Crowley MCSE+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 Webb, Andy Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 9:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!? Oh, it's the same guy all right. http://www.infonition.com/home.shtml And his age old arguments about how unprofessional we all are are now here: http://www.infonition.com/ethics.shtml Of course he's still wrong. His counterpoint to IT people being unethical compared to doctors and lawyers is ridiculous. Do give http://www.infonition.com/docs/Briefs/The%20Importance%20of%20Ethics%20i n%20IT.pdf a read for fun. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 9:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!? At only 88 pages, it doesn't seem like it would be the same guy. He used to have posts in this list longer than that! Ed Crowley MCSE+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 Brett Bielby Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 6:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Deckler wrote a book?!? For those of you that remember the early days of the list, is this the same Deckler that used to post here? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0595289703/qid%3D1063417520/sr%3D 11-1 /ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/102-3211233-4840161 _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: Deckler wrote a book?!?
Well, to look at your point about a Pfizer certification, don't mechanics have different certifications based on what type of automobiles they work on? I believe there's a Ford certification and something else... I'm not real knowledgable on the subject. Matt -Original Message- From: Joel Wampler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 9:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!? maybe i'm missing something here, but i just read that ethics thing and it looks like this to me if you ask 100 people on the street who is more professional a doctor or it guy, probably everyone would say doctor ergo if it people want to be considered as professional as doctors and get paid similar salaries then we need to create a professional governing body and not have silly things like microsoft certification that would be the equivalent of having pfizer certification as a doctor, which dont make no sense obviously there are some strong feelings about some past history that i have no idea about but the ethics piece looks like a sound argument to me Same old bag of gas. IT consultants are all unprofessional except for me. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T _ 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] _ 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: Deckler wrote a book?!?
Hmmm. Oddly enough, I would have figured it to be the other way round; that any person who attempts to keep me from being able to do my job freely with no complications was a capitalist wage-slave owner, but's that's just my particular set of thoughts... Matt -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 3:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!? Pardon my penny and a half's worth, but any site with connections to an organization that has Social Responsibility in it, is nothing more than a front for some wildly left leaning, anti-capitalist, anti-business nest of hobgoblins. John Matteson Geac Corporate ISS (404) 239 - 2981 Atlanta, Georgia, USA. -Original Message- From: Webb, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Saturday, September 13, 2003 12:20 AM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Deckler wrote a book?!? Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!? Oh, it's the same guy all right. http://www.infonition.com/home.shtml And his age old arguments about how unprofessional we all are are now here: http://www.infonition.com/ethics.shtml Of course he's still wrong. His counterpoint to IT people being unethical compared to doctors and lawyers is ridiculous. Do give http://www.infonition.com/docs/Briefs/The%20Importance%20of%20Ethics%20i n%20IT.pdf a read for fun. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 9:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!? At only 88 pages, it doesn't seem like it would be the same guy. He used to have posts in this list longer than that! Ed Crowley MCSE+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 Brett Bielby Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 6:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Deckler wrote a book?!? For those of you that remember the early days of the list, is this the same Deckler that used to post here? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0595289703/qid%3D1063417520/sr%3D 11-1 /ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/102-3211233-4840161 _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: Deckler wrote a book?!?
Hear hear. It's not like IT professionals are politicians taking kickbacks and getting thousands and thousands of dollars in gift money. Doctors need a code of ethics because of the nature of their career-path; it's so amazingly easy to ruin someone's life as a doctor (or save it, of course). You tell me where we have such power. Matt -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 4:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!? The problem with Deckler's ethics argument, as Andy pointed out, is that by his logic if you have Cisco golf shirt hanging in your closet then you are automatically unethical. Equally absurd is his assertion that lawyers and doctors don't face the same issues -- my mother is a medical professional; she spent 20 years in private medical practice in Los Angeles and I can assure you that there was hardly a pencil holder, ruler or coffee mug in her home that didn't have the name of some pharmaceutical on it. I work for lawyers and I guarantee you that if it's raining hard in downtown Honolulu you will see attorneys crossing the street with Lexis/Nexis and Bank of Hawaii umbrellas. Are we to believe that a tax attorney with a Bank of Hawaii umbrella is unethical because he's going to automatically steer all of his clients to place their investment accounts at BankOH? Greg believes that because I'm a Microsoft MVP that I'm just an unethical front for Microsoft with a massive conflict of interest and thus unable to properly represent any other product. A ludicrous assertion on the face of it: I make no commissions, Microsoft doesn't know or care how often (or if at all) I recommend their products and my MVP status is in no way dependant upon my advocating Microsoft products. Microsoft has not threatened to revoke my status because I have a couple of Linux boxes down the hall. Microsoft MVPs are often some of Microsoft's harshest critics; especially to their faces. The fact is that despite my MVP status my firm is still a WordPerfect shop. I have a handful of very nice ProLaw pens that the sales rep gave me and exactly zero seats of ProLaw installed. I have Symantec hats, pens and Post-It pads...but no Symantec software currently installed. Epson sent me some promotional pens and laser pointers in exchange for receiving literature about their new projectors -- I haven't bought a new projector in about 3 years. If I do, I'll consider Epson along with several other brands. I'm a CNA with no NetWare installed. Maybe I am the rare IT guy with nerves of steel, but the fact is that some vendor giving my knick-knacks, some initials or a free CD of demo software just isn't going to cause me to recommend a solution that I don't believe is the best solution. -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joel Wampler Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 3:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!? maybe i'm missing something here, but i just read that ethics thing and it looks like this to me if you ask 100 people on the street who is more professional a doctor or it guy, probably everyone would say doctor ergo if it people want to be considered as professional as doctors and get paid similar salaries then we need to create a professional governing body and not have silly things like microsoft certification that would be the equivalent of having pfizer certification as a doctor, which dont make no sense obviously there are some strong feelings about some past history that i have no idea about but the ethics piece looks like a sound argument to me Same old bag of gas. IT consultants are all unprofessional except for me. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: Exchange or Outlook slow
This is just a problem when sending emails? Not when opening emails? -Original Message- From: Christopher Henry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 11:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange or Outlook slow I have a problem that is affecting two users on my network, and I cannot figure it out...maybe someone here can help. Outlook on both computers takes about 30 seconds to send and email to people outside of our domain and sometimes to people inside our domain. For everyone else email works fine. Any suggestions on what it might be? Could it be something local or something at the server level? Both computers are fully patched, both windows and Office service packs are installed and all updates applied. We are using Office XP and Exchange 2000. Thank for your help Christopher H. _ 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] _ 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]
Slightly off-topic
I know this is a bit off-topic, but what are you folks using to keep your Outlook/Office installations up to date? Since there's no automatic updates, and SUS supposedly doesn't support office updates... Are you using third-party tools? Thanks, Matt _ 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]
Win2k SP 4 with Exchange 5.5
Does anyone else have this same setup and have you experienced any problems with upgrading to Win2K SP 4? Windows 2000, SP3 with all hotfixes, Exchange 5.5 SP 4 I'm just wondering about any major issues with Win2K SP4 interfering with Exchange that anyone else has experienced. Thanks, Matt _ 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: Win2k SP 4 with Exchange 5.5
Hmm... Patch to Exchange or to the OS? -Original Message- From: John Strongosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 4:32 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. Microsoft tech said there was going to be patch soon. john -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 and have you experienced any problems with upgrading to Win2K SP 4? Windows 2000, SP3 with all hotfixes, Exchange 5.5 SP 4 I'm just wondering about any major issues with Win2K SP4 interfering with Exchange that anyone else has experienced. Thanks, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: Win2k SP 4 with Exchange 5.5
Bah. Helpful you are not - so says Yoda. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 4:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Win2k SP 4 with Exchange 5.5 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 PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 4:32 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. Microsoft tech said there was going to be patch soon. john -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 and have you experienced any problems with upgrading to Win2K SP 4? Windows 2000, SP3 with all hotfixes, Exchange 5.5 SP 4 I'm just wondering about any major issues with Win2K SP4 interfering with Exchange that anyone else has experienced. Thanks, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: Replication and Schema problem
Well, it already has. We just haven't been able to figure it out yet. Likely it ahs to do with native vs. mixed AD modes, but even the Enterprise Admins are relative newbies and none of us are really knowledgable about this. I'm still having trouble finding adequate documentation on how to diagnose replication issues. -Original Message- From: Jeff Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 6:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem Don't try and finagle a way around the issue. Fix the replication problem between the domains. It will cause you great distress further down the road. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Posted At: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:50 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Replication and Schema problem Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem No, we are unable to run DomainPrep. It says that ForestPrep has not been run on the server, therefore it cannot run DomainPrep. However, the server is not part of the root domain, therefore ForestPrep cannot be run on it. The problem exists that the server has still not replicated the schema changes from the root domain. This is why I was wondering if there was another way to force the issue. I have also not seen any information anywhere about why the server would not be able to replicate schema between itself and the root domain, even though the root is mixed and this is native. Do those two exist in such a different way that the schema cannot be replicated between them? -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem ForestPrep is just that - forest wide. Its all or nothing. I'm guessing you didn't run DomainPrep in this domain - and that IS domain specific, and needs to be run in each domain hosting Exchange servers (or users, IIRC). -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Replication and Schema problem Hopefully someone on this list will have a suggestion as to what to do with this problem: Upgrading from NT 4.0 domain/Exch. 5.5 - SP4 to AD with Exch 2000. The domain in question is not the root domain for the forest, but ForestPrep has been run successfully in the root. This particular domain is now Native mode (AD native mode vs. Exchange native) where the root domain is still mixed mode. ForestPrep changes to the schema have not replicated down to this domain, and I assume it's because of the Native vs. Mixed mode for AD. However, that may be an incorrect assumption. I've checked out a number of knowledgebase articles as well as Microsoft's Exch 2000 Admin's Guide and Mark Minasi's Windows 2000 Server books, but have not found a reason yet as to why there is no replication of schema other. So, I still have to think that this is the problem. Can anyone point me in the right direction with this problem? As it is the users in the new AD domain here are still able to access their Exch 5.5 mailboxes even though they log on in the AD domain, but they can't (of course) access their email through OWA, unless I go in and change their password in the NT 4.0 domain to match that in the AD. As an alternative solution, is there a method for exporting the schema from the root domain and manually importing it here to re-establish identical schemas? Is there a way to force this domain to run ForestPrep on it, even though it's not the root domain? Thanks for any help... I'm going to keep looking around for more info myself. Matt _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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] _ 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: Replication and Schema problem
Hah! OK, I was wondering about whether we needed to be set up as a Global Catalog. I was seeing that that was not set up when looking at the schema with LDP to see if the Exchange settings has replicated down to us. So, this is most likely more of a problem with us not being set as a Global catalog? Not to seem greedy here, but we also have three branches which each have a DC. In case of outtages on our T1's, would it be beneficial to have those servers be Global Catalogs as well? We've had trouble with those local PC's logging on when the T1's go down, but I think that has to do with no DNS/WINS being at those locations. We are looking to install those services there soon. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 12:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem I can assure you that it isn't due to mixed modes of AD - that has no effect on the schema changes. Now, it could be because of a lack of 'local' global catalogs because you're still using a downlevel BDC. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 12:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem Well, it already has. We just haven't been able to figure it out yet. Likely it ahs to do with native vs. mixed AD modes, but even the Enterprise Admins are relative newbies and none of us are really knowledgable about this. I'm still having trouble finding adequate documentation on how to diagnose replication issues. -Original Message- From: Jeff Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 6:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem Don't try and finagle a way around the issue. Fix the replication problem between the domains. It will cause you great distress further down the road. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Posted At: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:50 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Replication and Schema problem Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem No, we are unable to run DomainPrep. It says that ForestPrep has not been run on the server, therefore it cannot run DomainPrep. However, the server is not part of the root domain, therefore ForestPrep cannot be run on it. The problem exists that the server has still not replicated the schema changes from the root domain. This is why I was wondering if there was another way to force the issue. I have also not seen any information anywhere about why the server would not be able to replicate schema between itself and the root domain, even though the root is mixed and this is native. Do those two exist in such a different way that the schema cannot be replicated between them? -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem ForestPrep is just that - forest wide. Its all or nothing. I'm guessing you didn't run DomainPrep in this domain - and that IS domain specific, and needs to be run in each domain hosting Exchange servers (or users, IIRC). -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Replication and Schema problem Hopefully someone on this list will have a suggestion as to what to do with this problem: Upgrading from NT 4.0 domain/Exch. 5.5 - SP4 to AD with Exch 2000. The domain in question is not the root domain for the forest, but ForestPrep has been run successfully in the root. This particular domain is now Native mode (AD native mode vs. Exchange native) where the root domain is still mixed mode. ForestPrep changes to the schema have not replicated down to this domain, and I assume it's because of the Native vs. Mixed mode for AD. However, that may be an incorrect assumption. I've checked out a number of knowledgebase articles as well as Microsoft's Exch 2000 Admin's Guide and Mark Minasi's Windows 2000 Server books, but have not found a reason yet as to why there is no replication of schema other. So, I still have to think that this is the problem. Can anyone point me in the right direction with this problem? As it is the users in the new AD domain here are still able to access their Exch 5.5 mailboxes even though they log on in the AD domain
RE: Replication and Schema problem
Yeah, it was no big deal here. I'm not quite sure why we didn't think about it at the time. It's really our first foray into remote DC's. In the past we always just had two domain controllers for Windows NT 4.0 here, and if the T1's went down then people had no access to anything. Now (and we're a public library) all our PC's have Office and some other productivity apps on them, so it's necessary that users be able to log on even if the Internet is no longer available. I'll make sure to pass on that any site that has Exchange needs a Global Catalog server. That will help our Enterprise Admins make up their minds on that issue... Matt -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem You need to have a Global Catalog server in every AD Site that hosts Exchange (not Exchange site, AD Site). As far as the remote offices, it depends. GC's can help with a number of things, including password changes, logins, etc. If you don't have local DNS servers though, having or not having a GC in the remote location ain't gonna do squat for your remote offices. DNS holds the records for the global catalog servers. If the client can't query DNS for where to find a GC, it can't find one. Setting up a DC with AD-integrated DNS is so easy to do. There's no reason not to. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, August 25, 2003 12:19 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Replication and Schema problem Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem Hah! OK, I was wondering about whether we needed to be set up as a Global Catalog. I was seeing that that was not set up when looking at the schema with LDP to see if the Exchange settings has replicated down to us. So, this is most likely more of a problem with us not being set as a Global catalog? Not to seem greedy here, but we also have three branches which each have a DC. In case of outtages on our T1's, would it be beneficial to have those servers be Global Catalogs as well? We've had trouble with those local PC's logging on when the T1's go down, but I think that has to do with no DNS/WINS being at those locations. We are looking to install those services there soon. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 12:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem I can assure you that it isn't due to mixed modes of AD - that has no effect on the schema changes. Now, it could be because of a lack of 'local' global catalogs because you're still using a downlevel BDC. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 12:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem Well, it already has. We just haven't been able to figure it out yet. Likely it ahs to do with native vs. mixed AD modes, but even the Enterprise Admins are relative newbies and none of us are really knowledgable about this. I'm still having trouble finding adequate documentation on how to diagnose replication issues. -Original Message- From: Jeff Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 6:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem Don't try and finagle a way around the issue. Fix the replication problem between the domains. It will cause you great distress further down the road. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Posted At: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:50 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Replication and Schema problem Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem No, we are unable to run DomainPrep. It says that ForestPrep has not been run on the server, therefore it cannot run DomainPrep. However, the server is not part of the root domain, therefore ForestPrep cannot be run on it. The problem exists that the server has still not replicated the schema changes from the root domain. This is why I was wondering if there was another way to force the issue. I have also not seen any information anywhere about why the server would not be able to replicate schema between itself and the root domain, even though the root is mixed and this is native. Do those two exist in such a different way that the schema cannot be replicated between them? -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema
RE: Replication and Schema problem
Well, we've only got the one server. But, I've already gone in and set up GC's at all our AD sites. DomainPrep seems to have now worked, and our replication actually seems to have been solved by a time sync. Apparently when our servers were set up, the Time Service wasn't set to look at the DC's downtown for their time. Once that was completed, it looks like things are replicating now. By the way, thanks for all the help on this. It really has been helpful and illuminating. Matt -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem With Exchange, you can rarely have enough GC's. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem Hah! OK, I was wondering about whether we needed to be set up as a Global Catalog. I was seeing that that was not set up when looking at the schema with LDP to see if the Exchange settings has replicated down to us. So, this is most likely more of a problem with us not being set as a Global catalog? Not to seem greedy here, but we also have three branches which each have a DC. In case of outtages on our T1's, would it be beneficial to have those servers be Global Catalogs as well? We've had trouble with those local PC's logging on when the T1's go down, but I think that has to do with no DNS/WINS being at those locations. We are looking to install those services there soon. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 12:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem I can assure you that it isn't due to mixed modes of AD - that has no effect on the schema changes. Now, it could be because of a lack of 'local' global catalogs because you're still using a downlevel BDC. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 12:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem Well, it already has. We just haven't been able to figure it out yet. Likely it ahs to do with native vs. mixed AD modes, but even the Enterprise Admins are relative newbies and none of us are really knowledgable about this. I'm still having trouble finding adequate documentation on how to diagnose replication issues. -Original Message- From: Jeff Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 6:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem Don't try and finagle a way around the issue. Fix the replication problem between the domains. It will cause you great distress further down the road. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Posted At: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:50 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Replication and Schema problem Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem No, we are unable to run DomainPrep. It says that ForestPrep has not been run on the server, therefore it cannot run DomainPrep. However, the server is not part of the root domain, therefore ForestPrep cannot be run on it. The problem exists that the server has still not replicated the schema changes from the root domain. This is why I was wondering if there was another way to force the issue. I have also not seen any information anywhere about why the server would not be able to replicate schema between itself and the root domain, even though the root is mixed and this is native. Do those two exist in such a different way that the schema cannot be replicated between them? -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem ForestPrep is just that - forest wide. Its all or nothing. I'm guessing you didn't run DomainPrep in this domain - and that IS domain specific, and needs to be run in each domain hosting Exchange servers (or users, IIRC). -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions
Replication and Schema problem
Hopefully someone on this list will have a suggestion as to what to do with this problem: Upgrading from NT 4.0 domain/Exch. 5.5 - SP4 to AD with Exch 2000. The domain in question is not the root domain for the forest, but ForestPrep has been run successfully in the root. This particular domain is now Native mode (AD native mode vs. Exchange native) where the root domain is still mixed mode. ForestPrep changes to the schema have not replicated down to this domain, and I assume it's because of the Native vs. Mixed mode for AD. However, that may be an incorrect assumption. I've checked out a number of knowledgebase articles as well as Microsoft's Exch 2000 Admin's Guide and Mark Minasi's Windows 2000 Server books, but have not found a reason yet as to why there is no replication of schema other. So, I still have to think that this is the problem. Can anyone point me in the right direction with this problem? As it is the users in the new AD domain here are still able to access their Exch 5.5 mailboxes even though they log on in the AD domain, but they can't (of course) access their email through OWA, unless I go in and change their password in the NT 4.0 domain to match that in the AD. As an alternative solution, is there a method for exporting the schema from the root domain and manually importing it here to re-establish identical schemas? Is there a way to force this domain to run ForestPrep on it, even though it's not the root domain? Thanks for any help... I'm going to keep looking around for more info myself. Matt _ 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: Replication and Schema problem
No, we are unable to run DomainPrep. It says that ForestPrep has not been run on the server, therefore it cannot run DomainPrep. However, the server is not part of the root domain, therefore ForestPrep cannot be run on it. The problem exists that the server has still not replicated the schema changes from the root domain. This is why I was wondering if there was another way to force the issue. I have also not seen any information anywhere about why the server would not be able to replicate schema between itself and the root domain, even though the root is mixed and this is native. Do those two exist in such a different way that the schema cannot be replicated between them? -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem ForestPrep is just that - forest wide. Its all or nothing. I'm guessing you didn't run DomainPrep in this domain - and that IS domain specific, and needs to be run in each domain hosting Exchange servers (or users, IIRC). -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Replication and Schema problem Hopefully someone on this list will have a suggestion as to what to do with this problem: Upgrading from NT 4.0 domain/Exch. 5.5 - SP4 to AD with Exch 2000. The domain in question is not the root domain for the forest, but ForestPrep has been run successfully in the root. This particular domain is now Native mode (AD native mode vs. Exchange native) where the root domain is still mixed mode. ForestPrep changes to the schema have not replicated down to this domain, and I assume it's because of the Native vs. Mixed mode for AD. However, that may be an incorrect assumption. I've checked out a number of knowledgebase articles as well as Microsoft's Exch 2000 Admin's Guide and Mark Minasi's Windows 2000 Server books, but have not found a reason yet as to why there is no replication of schema other. So, I still have to think that this is the problem. Can anyone point me in the right direction with this problem? As it is the users in the new AD domain here are still able to access their Exch 5.5 mailboxes even though they log on in the AD domain, but they can't (of course) access their email through OWA, unless I go in and change their password in the NT 4.0 domain to match that in the AD. As an alternative solution, is there a method for exporting the schema from the root domain and manually importing it here to re-establish identical schemas? Is there a way to force this domain to run ForestPrep on it, even though it's not the root domain? Thanks for any help... I'm going to keep looking around for more info myself. Matt _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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] _ 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]
Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000
I'm beginning the process of an in-place upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exchange 2000, and I wanted to make sure I had the right ideas about how to go about this. 1. I downloaded the In-Place Upgrade Whitepaper from Microsoft. Is this a definitive document or is there something in the document that is, in your experience, junk? I'd hate to follow this and find out MS has something wrong... 2. The server that 5.5 currently resides on is Windows 2000, SP 3, and is in an NT 4.0 domain at the moment. I assume I need to bring it into the AD before I can begin this upgrade process? Should I do this only if I want to avoid having to use the ASD connectors? I'm a bit confused on this point. 3. I'm trying to get my AD administrators to allow my domain admins to have the ability to update the schema (for my domain at least). I realize we need this, at least according to this whitepaper and the list FAQ. 4. My domain is already in native mode, so that isn't a problem. I've also transferred all the old user accounts from my NT 4.0 domain over using the migration wizard, so the SID's should be the same for the accounts when the users attempt to access their mailboxes after the upgrade. 5. I'm planning on doing a full online backup before doing anything, of course. I'm doing my best to read through all the information I can find on this topic, but there are often things that are missing from such documents. Is there anything obviously wrong with what I've talked about above? Any specific pointers to give on this process? Thank you very much, Matt _ 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: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000
OK, wonderful. That will be a big help. Of course I understand that whitepapers are written to be the guides to a correct installation. However, my experiences have told me that you're much better off verifying that the information in such a document is correct first before trusting it completely. I've had too many such instructions leave out some critical component that meant many more hours of hassle instead of a nice clean install. Matt -Original Message- From: Peter Orlowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 11:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 Have a look at the Exchange 2003 help. They have a step by step walkthrough of all the upgrade/migration paths. Its basically a stripped down version of whats in the whitepapers but its layed out like a checklist. These whitepapers are not junk. Understanding then can mean the difference between a failed or successful upgrade. - Peter -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 8:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 I'm beginning the process of an in-place upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exchange 2000, and I wanted to make sure I had the right ideas about how to go about this. 1. I downloaded the In-Place Upgrade Whitepaper from Microsoft. Is this a definitive document or is there something in the document that is, in your experience, junk? I'd hate to follow this and find out MS has something wrong... 2. The server that 5.5 currently resides on is Windows 2000, SP 3, and is in an NT 4.0 domain at the moment. I assume I need to bring it into the AD before I can begin this upgrade process? Should I do this only if I want to avoid having to use the ASD connectors? I'm a bit confused on this point. 3. I'm trying to get my AD administrators to allow my domain admins to have the ability to update the schema (for my domain at least). I realize we need this, at least according to this whitepaper and the list FAQ. 4. My domain is already in native mode, so that isn't a problem. I've also transferred all the old user accounts from my NT 4.0 domain over using the migration wizard, so the SID's should be the same for the accounts when the users attempt to access their mailboxes after the upgrade. 5. I'm planning on doing a full online backup before doing anything, of course. I'm doing my best to read through all the information I can find on this topic, but there are often things that are missing from such documents. Is there anything obviously wrong with what I've talked about above? Any specific pointers to give on this process? Thank you very much, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000
Well, these things are a matter of money and time. Money for a test lab and a new copy of Exchange. We purchased E2K a while ago and have not had the AD environment to install it in until recently. It's what we bought, so it's what we're using... Off the top of your head, does E2K3 need to be in a Win2K3 AD or can it run in a Win2K AD? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 That's why test labs rock... And in addition to just reading the E2K3 help, I'd strongly recommend migration to it over E2K. From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:37:33 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 OK, wonderful. That will be a big help. Of course I understand that whitepapers are written to be the guides to a correct installation. However, my experiences have told me that you're much better off verifying that the information in such a document is correct first before trusting it completely. I've had too many such instructions leave out some critical component that meant many more hours of hassle instead of a nice clean install. Matt -Original Message- From: Peter Orlowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 11:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 Have a look at the Exchange 2003 help. They have a step by step walkthrough of all the upgrade/migration paths. Its basically a stripped down version of whats in the whitepapers but its layed out like a checklist. These whitepapers are not junk. Understanding then can mean the difference between a failed or successful upgrade. - Peter -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 8:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 I'm beginning the process of an in-place upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exchange 2000, and I wanted to make sure I had the right ideas about how to go about this. 1. I downloaded the In-Place Upgrade Whitepaper from Microsoft. Is this a definitive document or is there something in the document that is, in your experience, junk? I'd hate to follow this and find out MS has something wrong... 2. The server that 5.5 currently resides on is Windows 2000, SP 3, and is in an NT 4.0 domain at the moment. I assume I need to bring it into the AD before I can begin this upgrade process? Should I do this only if I want to avoid having to use the ASD connectors? I'm a bit confused on this point. 3. I'm trying to get my AD administrators to allow my domain admins to have the ability to update the schema (for my domain at least). I realize we need this, at least according to this whitepaper and the list FAQ. 4. My domain is already in native mode, so that isn't a problem. I've also transferred all the old user accounts from my NT 4.0 domain over using the migration wizard, so the SID's should be the same for the accounts when the users attempt to access their mailboxes after the upgrade. 5. I'm planning on doing a full online backup before doing anything, of course. I'm doing my best to read through all the information I can find on this topic, but there are often things that are missing from such documents. Is there anything obviously wrong with what I've talked about above? Any specific pointers to give on this process? Thank you very much, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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 =e nglish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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
RE: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000
Samantha, Thanks for the offer. If anything comes up I'll be sure to check with you. And thanks for the vote of confidence in the whitepaper... My techie paranoia alarms are just going off on this one. Matt -Original Message- From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 Hello. I did an in-place upgrade this past weekend. It is now Monday and all 1000 users have logged into Outlookno problems reported as of yet. If I can be of any assistance to you or you want to ask a specific question, please don't hesitate to ask. I used the MS White Paper on In-place Upgrades. Samantha -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 OK, wonderful. That will be a big help. Of course I understand that whitepapers are written to be the guides to a correct installation. However, my experiences have told me that you're much better off verifying that the information in such a document is correct first before trusting it completely. I've had too many such instructions leave out some critical component that meant many more hours of hassle instead of a nice clean install. Matt -Original Message- From: Peter Orlowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 11:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 Have a look at the Exchange 2003 help. They have a step by step walkthrough of all the upgrade/migration paths. Its basically a stripped down version of whats in the whitepapers but its layed out like a checklist. These whitepapers are not junk. Understanding then can mean the difference between a failed or successful upgrade. - Peter -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 8:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000 I'm beginning the process of an in-place upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exchange 2000, and I wanted to make sure I had the right ideas about how to go about this. 1. I downloaded the In-Place Upgrade Whitepaper from Microsoft. Is this a definitive document or is there something in the document that is, in your experience, junk? I'd hate to follow this and find out MS has something wrong... 2. The server that 5.5 currently resides on is Windows 2000, SP 3, and is in an NT 4.0 domain at the moment. I assume I need to bring it into the AD before I can begin this upgrade process? Should I do this only if I want to avoid having to use the ASD connectors? I'm a bit confused on this point. 3. I'm trying to get my AD administrators to allow my domain admins to have the ability to update the schema (for my domain at least). I realize we need this, at least according to this whitepaper and the list FAQ. 4. My domain is already in native mode, so that isn't a problem. I've also transferred all the old user accounts from my NT 4.0 domain over using the migration wizard, so the SID's should be the same for the accounts when the users attempt to access their mailboxes after the upgrade. 5. I'm planning on doing a full online backup before doing anything, of course. I'm doing my best to read through all the information I can find on this topic, but there are often things that are missing from such documents. Is there anything obviously wrong with what I've talked about above? Any specific pointers to give on this process? Thank you very much, Matt _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] _ 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
RE: Exchange 5.5 Licensing
You need to have as many CALs (client access licenses) as you do users who will connect. As far as I know each user must have their own CAL. Terminal Services works the way you're suggesting, but not this. You might not be able to buy a 5.5 CAL anymore... You may have to buy Exchange 2000 CALs (isn't there a Exchange 2003 coming out? In that case buy THOSE CALs), since a CAL is backwardly compatible. Matt -Original Message- From: Stew Leonard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 5.5 Licensing Can anyone explain how Exchange 5.5 licensing works. If we need to have 250 users mailboxes do we need 250 licenses? Is is based on concurrent users--for example if a company has 1000 mailboxes but at any point only 50 people are connected to the exchange server do you only need 50 licenses? Its a bit confusing, I am sure many of you will agree. We definitely want to make sure we do this the right way. Many thanks. Stew __ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com _ 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] _ 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: Exchange 5.5 Licensing
This certainly could have changed, since Microsoft is famouse for altering their licensing arrangements. At the time I bought CALs, we had to purchase them one per user. If MS really has made this change, then this is definitely a good thing. Matt -Original Message- From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 5.5 Licensing that is what I was told as well by my rep. It is now a CAL per device that connects. So if a person at one computer opens 5 mailboxes in Outlook it is only 1 CAL. - Original Message - From: Chinnery, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:31 PM Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 Licensing Some time ago (I believe it was last year), I listened to a webcast put on by Microsoft. During the Q A, one person asked the Microsoft rep what the licensing requirement would be for the following scenario: 5 Mailboxes all being accessed from 1 computer His answer: 1 license because only 1 machine was used. Which just goes to show, as had been said mb people much more experienced with Exchange than me, that it all depends on who you talk to and that you should always direct licensing questions to your Microsoft representative. Paul Chinnery Network Administrator Mem Med Ctr -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 11:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 Licensing You need to have as many CALs (client access licenses) as you do users who will connect. As far as I know each user must have their own CAL. Terminal Services works the way you're suggesting, but not this. You might not be able to buy a 5.5 CAL anymore... You may have to buy Exchange 2000 CALs (isn't there a Exchange 2003 coming out? In that case buy THOSE CALs), since a CAL is backwardly compatible. Matt -Original Message- From: Stew Leonard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 5.5 Licensing Can anyone explain how Exchange 5.5 licensing works. If we need to have 250 users mailboxes do we need 250 licenses? Is is based on concurrent users--for example if a company has 1000 mailboxes but at any point only 50 people are connected to the exchange server do you only need 50 licenses? Its a bit confusing, I am sure many of you will agree. We definitely want to make sure we do this the right way. Many thanks. Stew __ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: Open Relay Suggestions
We used to use Netscape's mail server back when it was free for educational use. At the time, we did have a closed relay system, but since our server wouldn't respond with a 550, we got blacklisted. It took us quite a lot of effort to get the various Anti-relay sites to accept that we were a closed relay. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 2:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Open Relay Suggestions Those aren't holes. One can legitimately accept mail for those addresses and as long as it isn't relayed to the final destination the server is relay secure. The designers of those tests have implemented their testing criteria improperly. -Original Message- From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, June 26, 2003 11:23 AM Posted To: swynk Conversation: Open Relay Suggestions Subject: Open Relay Suggestions I am using Interscan Virus wall as my incoming smtp server on port 25; which then forwards my mail to the Exchange IMC on port 6000. I have been testing against open relay testers and I always fail the one or two tests where they spam my domain name. I am assuming this is because Interscan cannot look up usernames to see if the mailbox is valid? For that matter I dont think Exchange 5.5's IMC does either? Anyway to close this last hole? Suggestions? I worked hard to get off all the RBL's the last mail admin had gotten us on . . . tia chris RSET 250 web3: Reset State MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sender Ok RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Recipient Ok _ 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] _ 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] _ 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: SMTP Routing for one internal system
Hey thanks! That worked for us... How annoying that single IP's won't work for this but the range will. We're behind a firewall and are using NAT, but still... I don't like my whole network being able to relay... -Original Message- From: Jim Collins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 4:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SMTP Routing for one internal system I have seen what I will call strange behavior when configuring the hosts and clients with these IP addresses in 5.5 E2K seems much more predictable with this configuration option. I've seen some where adding a particular IP does not work but defining a subnet of hosts DOES work. I did not come to a good understanding as to why, that's just what I've seen. Hope this helps some... Jim Collins Sr. Systems Engineer Competitive Computing, Inc. www.competitive.com -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 2:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SMTP Routing for one internal system I did give that a try already and I got no good results. I've even tried telnetting into the Exchange server once having made that change and was still given the 550 message. And, yes, I did restart the IMS. I'll give it a try with a full reboot of the server. Perhaps there's something glitchy going on... -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 2:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: SMTP Routing for one internal system Add an entry to the list of 'hosts and clients with these IP addresses' for the IP address of the host to relay. On 2/17/03 12:18, Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm having difficulty finding information on this either in MS's Knowledgebase or in the various books I have: We have routing turned on on our Exchange 5.5 box (latest SP's, etc.) but have it set so that relaying is not allowed via the recommended method (set for Hosts and clients with these IP addresses checked on, but no entries made to the list). We need to have one internal server be able to send SMTP through this box, though. We're using PHP's Sendmail module (and PERL's as well) to mail the results of form entries. However, since relaying is essentially turned off, only internal mail will work. Is there a way to leave the relaying settings as-is but have a one-IP exception to the rule? I hate to open up the relaying at all, but we need to get this working. Can anyone shed any light on this problem? What can I do to get relaying working from one IP only? Thanks, Matt _ 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] _ 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]
SMTP Routing for one internal system
I'm having difficulty finding information on this either in MS's Knowledgebase or in the various books I have: We have routing turned on on our Exchange 5.5 box (latest SP's, etc.) but have it set so that relaying is not allowed via the recommended method (set for Hosts and clients with these IP addresses checked on, but no entries made to the list). We need to have one internal server be able to send SMTP through this box, though. We're using PHP's Sendmail module (and PERL's as well) to mail the results of form entries. However, since relaying is essentially turned off, only internal mail will work. Is there a way to leave the relaying settings as-is but have a one-IP exception to the rule? I hate to open up the relaying at all, but we need to get this working. Can anyone shed any light on this problem? What can I do to get relaying working from one IP only? Thanks, Matt _ 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: SMTP Routing for one internal system
I did give that a try already and I got no good results. I've even tried telnetting into the Exchange server once having made that change and was still given the 550 message. And, yes, I did restart the IMS. I'll give it a try with a full reboot of the server. Perhaps there's something glitchy going on... -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 2:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: SMTP Routing for one internal system Add an entry to the list of 'hosts and clients with these IP addresses' for the IP address of the host to relay. On 2/17/03 12:18, Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm having difficulty finding information on this either in MS's Knowledgebase or in the various books I have: We have routing turned on on our Exchange 5.5 box (latest SP's, etc.) but have it set so that relaying is not allowed via the recommended method (set for Hosts and clients with these IP addresses checked on, but no entries made to the list). We need to have one internal server be able to send SMTP through this box, though. We're using PHP's Sendmail module (and PERL's as well) to mail the results of form entries. However, since relaying is essentially turned off, only internal mail will work. Is there a way to leave the relaying settings as-is but have a one-IP exception to the rule? I hate to open up the relaying at all, but we need to get this working. Can anyone shed any light on this problem? What can I do to get relaying working from one IP only? Thanks, Matt _ 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]
Lost/Partial Messages
Anyone ever run into a situation where certain users are sending/receiving only partial email messages (Exch. 5.5/SP4, on Win2000 SP2 member server)? One user in particular sends messages out that then do not contain all the necessary text within them. The same message can go to two different recipients, with one receiving all and another only receiving half, or none at all. The headers still come through, but not the full messages. I haven't found anything in the FAQ (maybe I haven't looked hard enough) or in the KB. I also have not found any errors that appear to be related to this in the event log. Could be packet loss, but I haven't encountered any users complaining of partial messages from the Internet. Any help? Thanks! Matt _ 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: Lost/Partial Messages
All going Internal. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Lost/Partial Messages Are these messages all going internal, or external? -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 1:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Lost/Partial Messages Anyone ever run into a situation where certain users are sending/receiving only partial email messages (Exch. 5.5/SP4, on Win2000 SP2 member server)? One user in particular sends messages out that then do not contain all the necessary text within them. The same message can go to two different recipients, with one receiving all and another only receiving half, or none at all. The headers still come through, but not the full messages. I haven't found anything in the FAQ (maybe I haven't looked hard enough) or in the KB. I also have not found any errors that appear to be related to this in the event log. Could be packet loss, but I haven't encountered any users complaining of partial messages from the Internet. Any help? Thanks! Matt _ 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: Lost/Partial Messages
Additionally, one more thing: I have not received personally any of these partial messages. I've even tried to have the prime offender send me many test messages, none of which have ever been truncated. It's very difficult to see whether this is a real problem or just some bizarre user error. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Lost/Partial Messages All going Internal. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Lost/Partial Messages Are these messages all going internal, or external? -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 1:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Lost/Partial Messages Anyone ever run into a situation where certain users are sending/receiving only partial email messages (Exch. 5.5/SP4, on Win2000 SP2 member server)? One user in particular sends messages out that then do not contain all the necessary text within them. The same message can go to two different recipients, with one receiving all and another only receiving half, or none at all. The headers still come through, but not the full messages. I haven't found anything in the FAQ (maybe I haven't looked hard enough) or in the KB. I also have not found any errors that appear to be related to this in the event log. Could be packet loss, but I haven't encountered any users complaining of partial messages from the Internet. Any help? Thanks! Matt _ 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] _ 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: Lost/Partial Messages
So far everything appears to be straight text. I've managed in most cases to find another copy of the email (this user has been sending these out to multiple recipients) that actually went through OK. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Lost/Partial Messages Maybe the part of the message is a pasted spreadsheet or something and the other user does not have the appropriate software to view. - Original Message - From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:38 PM Subject: RE: Lost/Partial Messages Additionally, one more thing: I have not received personally any of these partial messages. I've even tried to have the prime offender send me many test messages, none of which have ever been truncated. It's very difficult to see whether this is a real problem or just some bizarre user error. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Lost/Partial Messages All going Internal. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Lost/Partial Messages Are these messages all going internal, or external? -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 1:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Lost/Partial Messages Anyone ever run into a situation where certain users are sending/receiving only partial email messages (Exch. 5.5/SP4, on Win2000 SP2 member server)? One user in particular sends messages out that then do not contain all the necessary text within them. The same message can go to two different recipients, with one receiving all and another only receiving half, or none at all. The headers still come through, but not the full messages. I haven't found anything in the FAQ (maybe I haven't looked hard enough) or in the KB. I also have not found any errors that appear to be related to this in the event log. Could be packet loss, but I haven't encountered any users complaining of partial messages from the Internet. Any help? Thanks! Matt _ 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] _ 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]
OWA and email form problems
Hello, We're having a problem I haven't found any Q articles on... We occasionally run email surveys... the email itself has a web form in it that sends its input to a PERL script, which then sends the results to a certain user. This form works correctly when accessed through Outlook, but not through OWA. (BTW... Exch. 5.5, SP4, Win2K Server, SP2) When a user attempts to fill out the form in OWA, the recipient just gets a blank form (has all the formatting the PERL script sends out, just no input from the form). Anyone able to tell me why OWA is not allowing form input to the script? Thanks, Matt _ 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: OWA and email form problems
All it is is an HTML form... it has no PERL scripting in it, but it does reference a PERL script that runs from IIS. Does the issue you describe still apply? -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 12:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA and email form problems What did you actually do? Do you have an Outlook form that you've created with Perl Script in it? If that's the case, it won't work with OWA because OWA by default doesn't know how to display forms of type IPM.Note.xx. It can display IPM.Note only (for message type items). You need to publish your custom form to OWA. You can use the HTML Form Converter (which is on the SP4 CD) to do this. However, I have never tried it with an existing HTML message. You may need to do some tweaking after. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 9:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA and email form problems Hello, We're having a problem I haven't found any Q articles on... We occasionally run email surveys... the email itself has a web form in it that sends its input to a PERL script, which then sends the results to a certain user. This form works correctly when accessed through Outlook, but not through OWA. (BTW... Exch. 5.5, SP4, Win2K Server, SP2) When a user attempts to fill out the form in OWA, the recipient just gets a blank form (has all the formatting the PERL script sends out, just no input from the form). Anyone able to tell me why OWA is not allowing form input to the script? Thanks, Matt _ 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]
Antivirus Suite recommendations
Hello! Upon attempting to renew our license with NAI for our TVD suite, I've found that the cost of renewal is significantly greater ($8500 +) than what we originally purchased the suite for (around $3000). Of course, we are going from 101 nodes to 175 nodes, but the jump in cost is enormous. Therefore, I am looking for potential alternatives. I know that there are other vendors that are noted as being worth looking into (Trend, AntiGen, etc.). Any suggestions then, especially in light of cost? I'd really like to find something that might come in a whole lot closer to our original cost for TVD, plus the extra nodes we need (under 200). It really is important that the suite be able to handle integrating well with Exchange 5.5. Especially when it comes to attachment blocking. Thanks much! Matt Hoffman _ 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: Antivirus Suite recommendations
Martin, since I have no experience with Trend, I assume that there are similar methods for updating workstations with the latest virus definitions and engine upgrades? Is the cost reasonable? Unfortunately, Ohio libraries (like us) are losing money this year due to state budget cuts. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Well, for Exchange AV, Trend and Antigen are THE names. For a suite, I would definitely go with Trend. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Antivirus Suite recommendations Hello! Upon attempting to renew our license with NAI for our TVD suite, I've found that the cost of renewal is significantly greater ($8500 +) than what we originally purchased the suite for (around $3000). Of course, we are going from 101 nodes to 175 nodes, but the jump in cost is enormous. Therefore, I am looking for potential alternatives. I know that there are other vendors that are noted as being worth looking into (Trend, AntiGen, etc.). Any suggestions then, especially in light of cost? I'd really like to find something that might come in a whole lot closer to our original cost for TVD, plus the extra nodes we need (under 200). It really is important that the suite be able to handle integrating well with Exchange 5.5. Especially when it comes to attachment blocking. Thanks much! Matt Hoffman _ 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: Antivirus Suite recommendations
Excellent. Well, it is the one that seems to be most often noted as a good product-line on this list. So, I'll see what their salespeople are able to tell me. Thanks! -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations 100 users is about 3300 list. Yes, it is all centrally managed. The server DL's that Dats, etc and then distributes them out. I dotn think you will find a more reliable suite of products. Every one of them is awesome. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Martin, since I have no experience with Trend, I assume that there are similar methods for updating workstations with the latest virus definitions and engine upgrades? Is the cost reasonable? Unfortunately, Ohio libraries (like us) are losing money this year due to state budget cuts. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Well, for Exchange AV, Trend and Antigen are THE names. For a suite, I would definitely go with Trend. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Antivirus Suite recommendations Hello! Upon attempting to renew our license with NAI for our TVD suite, I've found that the cost of renewal is significantly greater ($8500 +) than what we originally purchased the suite for (around $3000). Of course, we are going from 101 nodes to 175 nodes, but the jump in cost is enormous. Therefore, I am looking for potential alternatives. I know that there are other vendors that are noted as being worth looking into (Trend, AntiGen, etc.). Any suggestions then, especially in light of cost? I'd really like to find something that might come in a whole lot closer to our original cost for TVD, plus the extra nodes we need (under 200). It really is important that the suite be able to handle integrating well with Exchange 5.5. Especially when it comes to attachment blocking. Thanks much! Matt Hoffman _ 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] _ 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: Antivirus Suite recommendations
Most of the time, yes. The quotes I got for NAI's suite were supposedly at a 42% discount, but wre still winding up at around $86 a pop. That's far too much for us to be paying. I've been told that using one set of products on the desktop and anotehr on the servers is a good idea, as one product may catch things that anothr does not. That seems like a sound idea. So, maybe my solution ought to be to look at Trend for the servers and keep things simple for my users and stick with McAfee on the desktops (so they won't freak out, which they so often do with anything new). BTW, where did you find that cost estimate? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations I found 150 Users, $4500 Don't you guys get some kind of discount, like schools? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations 100 users is about 3300 list. Yes, it is all centrally managed. The server DL's that Dats, etc and then distributes them out. I dotn think you will find a more reliable suite of products. Every one of them is awesome. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Martin, since I have no experience with Trend, I assume that there are similar methods for updating workstations with the latest virus definitions and engine upgrades? Is the cost reasonable? Unfortunately, Ohio libraries (like us) are losing money this year due to state budget cuts. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Well, for Exchange AV, Trend and Antigen are THE names. For a suite, I would definitely go with Trend. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Antivirus Suite recommendations Hello! Upon attempting to renew our license with NAI for our TVD suite, I've found that the cost of renewal is significantly greater ($8500 +) than what we originally purchased the suite for (around $3000). Of course, we are going from 101 nodes to 175 nodes, but the jump in cost is enormous. Therefore, I am looking for potential alternatives. I know that there are other vendors that are noted as being worth looking into (Trend, AntiGen, etc.). Any suggestions then, especially in light of cost? I'd really like to find something that might come in a whole lot closer to our original cost for TVD, plus the extra nodes we need (under 200). It really is important that the suite be able to handle integrating well with Exchange 5.5. Especially when it comes to attachment blocking. Thanks much! Matt Hoffman _ 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] _ 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: Antivirus Suite recommendations
So far CDW has been pretty good to me. I've usually received product from them within a couple days of submitting a PO to them. Again, not necessarily the cheapest place around, but ease of ordering and service are still a big part of why I decide to purchase from them. -Original Message- From: Joel Musheno [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations And they have gotten parts to me next day even when I ordered at 5. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations CDW...Not exactly the low cost specialists, but they always have what I am searching for on a moments notice. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Most of the time, yes. The quotes I got for NAI's suite were supposedly at a 42% discount, but wre still winding up at around $86 a pop. That's far too much for us to be paying. I've been told that using one set of products on the desktop and anotehr on the servers is a good idea, as one product may catch things that anothr does not. That seems like a sound idea. So, maybe my solution ought to be to look at Trend for the servers and keep things simple for my users and stick with McAfee on the desktops (so they won't freak out, which they so often do with anything new). BTW, where did you find that cost estimate? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations I found 150 Users, $4500 Don't you guys get some kind of discount, like schools? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations 100 users is about 3300 list. Yes, it is all centrally managed. The server DL's that Dats, etc and then distributes them out. I dotn think you will find a more reliable suite of products. Every one of them is awesome. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Martin, since I have no experience with Trend, I assume that there are similar methods for updating workstations with the latest virus definitions and engine upgrades? Is the cost reasonable? Unfortunately, Ohio libraries (like us) are losing money this year due to state budget cuts. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Well, for Exchange AV, Trend and Antigen are THE names. For a suite, I would definitely go with Trend. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Antivirus Suite recommendations Hello! Upon attempting to renew our license with NAI for our TVD suite, I've found that the cost of renewal is significantly greater ($8500 +) than what we originally purchased the suite for (around $3000). Of course, we are going from 101 nodes to 175 nodes, but the jump in cost is enormous. Therefore, I am looking for potential alternatives. I know that there are other vendors that are noted as being worth looking into (Trend, AntiGen, etc.). Any suggestions then, especially in light of cost? I'd really like to find something that might come in a whole lot closer to our original cost for TVD, plus the extra nodes we need (under 200). It really is important that the suite be able to handle integrating well with Exchange 5.5. Especially when it comes to attachment blocking. Thanks much! Matt Hoffman _ 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: Antivirus Suite recommendations
I'm noting that CDW does have the NeaTSuite package for 250 users listed at under $8000. This is certainly a bit cheaper than NAI's package, however, what is Trend's licensing like? NAI wants you to re-license every two years. How about Trend? Is it similar? Maybe I'll get lucky and they only want you to buy it ONCE? -Original Message- From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations ...and they do have the funniest radio ads. I sympathize on your situation with NAI. We saw a similar price increase from them while actually reducing the number of nodes. I looked at it as a good excuse to get some good software, Antigen in our case. -Peter -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations So far CDW has been pretty good to me. I've usually received product from them within a couple days of submitting a PO to them. Again, not necessarily the cheapest place around, but ease of ordering and service are still a big part of why I decide to purchase from them. -Original Message- From: Joel Musheno [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations And they have gotten parts to me next day even when I ordered at 5. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations CDW...Not exactly the low cost specialists, but they always have what I am searching for on a moments notice. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Most of the time, yes. The quotes I got for NAI's suite were supposedly at a 42% discount, but wre still winding up at around $86 a pop. That's far too much for us to be paying. I've been told that using one set of products on the desktop and anotehr on the servers is a good idea, as one product may catch things that anothr does not. That seems like a sound idea. So, maybe my solution ought to be to look at Trend for the servers and keep things simple for my users and stick with McAfee on the desktops (so they won't freak out, which they so often do with anything new). BTW, where did you find that cost estimate? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations I found 150 Users, $4500 Don't you guys get some kind of discount, like schools? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations 100 users is about 3300 list. Yes, it is all centrally managed. The server DL's that Dats, etc and then distributes them out. I dotn think you will find a more reliable suite of products. Every one of them is awesome. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Martin, since I have no experience with Trend, I assume that there are similar methods for updating workstations with the latest virus definitions and engine upgrades? Is the cost reasonable? Unfortunately, Ohio libraries (like us) are losing money this year due to state budget cuts. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Well, for Exchange AV, Trend and Antigen are THE names. For a suite, I would definitely go with Trend. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Antivirus Suite recommendations Hello! Upon attempting to renew our license with NAI for our TVD suite, I've found that the cost of renewal is significantly greater ($8500 +) than what we originally purchased the suite for (around $3000). Of course, we are going from 101 nodes to 175 nodes, but the jump in cost is enormous. Therefore, I am looking for potential alternatives. I know that there are other vendors that are noted as being worth looking into (Trend, AntiGen, etc.). Any suggestions then, especially in light of cost? I'd really like to find something that might come in a whole lot closer to our original cost for TVD, plus the extra nodes we need (under 200). It really is important that the suite be able to handle integrating well with Exchange 5.5. Especially when it comes
RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations
Alright, I found it myself: Trend's got single-year licensing with the second year being an additional 20%. Sheesh. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 3:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations I'm noting that CDW does have the NeaTSuite package for 250 users listed at under $8000. This is certainly a bit cheaper than NAI's package, however, what is Trend's licensing like? NAI wants you to re-license every two years. How about Trend? Is it similar? Maybe I'll get lucky and they only want you to buy it ONCE? -Original Message- From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations ...and they do have the funniest radio ads. I sympathize on your situation with NAI. We saw a similar price increase from them while actually reducing the number of nodes. I looked at it as a good excuse to get some good software, Antigen in our case. -Peter -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations So far CDW has been pretty good to me. I've usually received product from them within a couple days of submitting a PO to them. Again, not necessarily the cheapest place around, but ease of ordering and service are still a big part of why I decide to purchase from them. -Original Message- From: Joel Musheno [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations And they have gotten parts to me next day even when I ordered at 5. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations CDW...Not exactly the low cost specialists, but they always have what I am searching for on a moments notice. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Most of the time, yes. The quotes I got for NAI's suite were supposedly at a 42% discount, but wre still winding up at around $86 a pop. That's far too much for us to be paying. I've been told that using one set of products on the desktop and anotehr on the servers is a good idea, as one product may catch things that anothr does not. That seems like a sound idea. So, maybe my solution ought to be to look at Trend for the servers and keep things simple for my users and stick with McAfee on the desktops (so they won't freak out, which they so often do with anything new). BTW, where did you find that cost estimate? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations I found 150 Users, $4500 Don't you guys get some kind of discount, like schools? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations 100 users is about 3300 list. Yes, it is all centrally managed. The server DL's that Dats, etc and then distributes them out. I dotn think you will find a more reliable suite of products. Every one of them is awesome. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Martin, since I have no experience with Trend, I assume that there are similar methods for updating workstations with the latest virus definitions and engine upgrades? Is the cost reasonable? Unfortunately, Ohio libraries (like us) are losing money this year due to state budget cuts. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Well, for Exchange AV, Trend and Antigen are THE names. For a suite, I would definitely go with Trend. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Antivirus Suite recommendations Hello! Upon attempting to renew our license with NAI for our TVD suite, I've found that the cost of renewal is significantly greater ($8500 +) than what we originally purchased the suite for (around $3000). Of course, we are going from 101 nodes to 175 nodes, but the jump in cost is enormous. Therefore, I am looking for potential alternatives. I know that there are other vendors that are noted as being worth looking into (Trend, AntiGen, etc.). Any
RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations
It's the software equivalent of planned obsolescence. *sigh* -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 3:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Antivirus Suite recommendations You're not buying the product. You get a term license for its use. Same with Antigen. - Original Message - From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:14 PM Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations I'm noting that CDW does have the NeaTSuite package for 250 users listed at under $8000. This is certainly a bit cheaper than NAI's package, however, what is Trend's licensing like? NAI wants you to re-license every two years. How about Trend? Is it similar? Maybe I'll get lucky and they only want you to buy it ONCE? -Original Message- From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations ...and they do have the funniest radio ads. I sympathize on your situation with NAI. We saw a similar price increase from them while actually reducing the number of nodes. I looked at it as a good excuse to get some good software, Antigen in our case. -Peter -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations So far CDW has been pretty good to me. I've usually received product from them within a couple days of submitting a PO to them. Again, not necessarily the cheapest place around, but ease of ordering and service are still a big part of why I decide to purchase from them. -Original Message- From: Joel Musheno [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations And they have gotten parts to me next day even when I ordered at 5. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations CDW...Not exactly the low cost specialists, but they always have what I am searching for on a moments notice. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Most of the time, yes. The quotes I got for NAI's suite were supposedly at a 42% discount, but wre still winding up at around $86 a pop. That's far too much for us to be paying. I've been told that using one set of products on the desktop and anotehr on the servers is a good idea, as one product may catch things that anothr does not. That seems like a sound idea. So, maybe my solution ought to be to look at Trend for the servers and keep things simple for my users and stick with McAfee on the desktops (so they won't freak out, which they so often do with anything new). BTW, where did you find that cost estimate? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations I found 150 Users, $4500 Don't you guys get some kind of discount, like schools? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations 100 users is about 3300 list. Yes, it is all centrally managed. The server DL's that Dats, etc and then distributes them out. I dotn think you will find a more reliable suite of products. Every one of them is awesome. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Martin, since I have no experience with Trend, I assume that there are similar methods for updating workstations with the latest virus definitions and engine upgrades? Is the cost reasonable? Unfortunately, Ohio libraries (like us) are losing money this year due to state budget cuts. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Well, for Exchange AV, Trend and Antigen are THE names. For a suite, I would definitely go with Trend. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Antivirus Suite recommendations Hello! Upon attempting to renew our license with NAI for our TVD suite, I've found that the cost of renewal is significantly greater
RE: [idea] Antivirus Suite recommendations
I can't wait to see the responses to this one! -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 4:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [idea] Antivirus Suite recommendations Sometimes taking a good one is just as good as sex. ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 4:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [idea] Antivirus Suite recommendations M taking a good s**t -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 1:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [idea] Antivirus Suite recommendations Once again...I love it when people start getting pissy. This is some good $hit! ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Milton R Dogg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 3:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE:[idea] Antivirus Suite recommendations I think once a week we need to post a list of links to the faq that answer: AV, Backup, moving a server, upgrading, and why not to run eseutil. Then we could have more time to answer real questions that don't get asked 3 times a day. Milton R Dogg Of The Dogg Foundation.. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of William Lefkovics Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Antivirus Suite recommendations You're not buying the product. You get a term license for its use. Same with Antigen. - Original Message - From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:14 PM Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations I'm noting that CDW does have the NeaTSuite package for 250 users listed at under $8000. This is certainly a bit cheaper than NAI's package, however, what is Trend's licensing like? NAI wants you to re-license every two years. How about Trend? Is it similar? Maybe I'll get lucky and they only want you to buy it ONCE? -Original Message- From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations ...and they do have the funniest radio ads. I sympathize on your situation with NAI. We saw a similar price increase from them while actually reducing the number of nodes. I looked at it as a good excuse to get some good software, Antigen in our case. -Peter -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations So far CDW has been pretty good to me. I've usually received product from them within a couple days of submitting a PO to them. Again, not necessarily the cheapest place around, but ease of ordering and service are still a big part of why I decide to purchase from them. -Original Message- From: Joel Musheno [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations And they have gotten parts to me next day even when I ordered at 5. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations CDW...Not exactly the low cost specialists, but they always have what I am searching for on a moments notice. -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations Most of the time, yes. The quotes I got for NAI's suite were supposedly at a 42% discount, but wre still winding up at around $86 a pop. That's far too much for us to be paying. I've been told that using one set of products on the desktop and anotehr on the servers is a good idea, as one product may catch things that anothr does not. That seems like a sound idea. So, maybe my solution ought to be to look at Trend for the servers and keep things simple for my users and stick with McAfee on the desktops (so they won't freak out, which they so often do with anything new). BTW, where did you find that cost estimate? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations I found 150 Users, $4500 Don't you guys
RE: New Virus ShakerWorld variant?
I can find no listings for this at Nai, nor can I find any listings in a Google or Overture search. A hoax possibly? Matt -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 2:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Virus ShakerWorld variant? What about the shake.exe file indicated in the message? Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-Outlook, CNA, MCPx3 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 9:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: New Virus ShakerWorld variant? I just got a message from OAR.NET referring to a virus alert. Still trying to find out more about it, but I thought I would post this just in case. Trying to find out more on this one to see if there is an attachment I can block. From: Jodi Santini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 1:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Virus Alert - W32/ShakerWorld Posted on notice.oar.net 1/4/02: Virus Alert: There is a variation of the W32/ShakerWorld virus making its way around the Internet. We are have not found information on this virus at Symantec or CERT yet, but this what we have learned thus far from our internal security folks which you will want to watch out for on your networks: o Random 8 char. file in the System directory o Shake.exe in email (MassMailer) o NetBIOS connections spreading virus to servers o Registry entry 'sysinfo' under the run statement. Note that we are seeing variants in the name of the key sysinforandom chars People who have been hit have gotten this virus thorugh email. This virus can install a key in the registry of the infected systems. This is the information we have received at this time. Thank You, Jodi Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 Phone - (513) 556-9076 Fax - (513) 556-2042 _ 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: open relay
Check this out: http://www.abuse.net/relay.html And the info on closing your open relay: http://www.exchangeadmin.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=7696 -Matt -Original Message- From: Dustin Krysak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 3:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: open relay Hi there... I'm looking for a web based test to see if my machine is an open relay - BUT I need a test that doesn't blacklist me anywhere. I just want to make sure, and if I am fix the issue ASAP. And also - since I am pretty new to exchange - how does one seal up an exchange server from being an open relay? -- Dustin Krysak _ 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: today's admin backwards virus
So, does anyone have a strong opinion on what filtering software to use? We haven't done anything along those lines before (hell, we didn't have antivirus until last year). I just want to use it for blocking attachments; we don't care about abilities relating to disclaimers or scanning for certain language/words. Any opinions would help. Thanks! Matt -Original Message- From: Waters, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus Jennifer, Most everyone has already hit on the obvious, most of us use the auto-update feature from the A/V product of our choosing. Then we go the extra step and use some sort of filtering, be it at the fire wall or just simple attachment blocking in our e-mail server A/V product. Here I block .exe;.vbs;.eml;.shs;.lnk attachments from even getting through the e-mail server. Take what has happened to your site up the ladder as a reason to put all this stuff in place! You might get some resistance, and even some complaints, however every time one of these things happens the efforts you have made will be seen and will be appreciated. TrueSecure www.trusecure.com has some good white papers on what types of attachments you should be, or at least thinking about blocking. Oh, the other thing we did was, well we threw IIS right out the window!! Good Luck Jeffrey R. Waters Senior Systems Engineer Information Technology, Hanover County -Original Message- From: Jennifer Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 6:10 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: today's admin backwards virus I was just noticing that most of the gurus of the list had plenty of time to respond to the list regarding various questions. Am I missing something? I have been updating virus software, scanning mailboxes, patching iis/owa servers etc. all night. We were hit externally, but we only had to restore one webserver (although it was similiar to a slightly compressed support.microsoft.com). Is there some secret to this sh*t that you are keeping from me regarding quick draw administration or is this something you pawn off to others? I will compensate for information. (Depending on validity.) I'm not jealous or bitter, btw...not. Jennifer Baker Fluke Corporation http://www.fluke.com http://www.flukenetworks.com mailto:[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]
RE: today's admin backwards virus
Well, there's a fundamental problem we have here; we're a public library, and freedom to write and receive email here is not to be impinged in any way. Even in blocking certain attachment types, I'm kind of stepping over the line. So, in terms of filtering for any virus-related terminology, I can probably get away with using software that filters for language. But, I will be told by management to turn it off if we attempt to do anything that restricts anything else. That's why I mentioned that it was not of great concern. Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 12:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus Blocking for certain words is an important part of filtering for viruses in my opinion. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax:(360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 9:00 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus So, does anyone have a strong opinion on what filtering software to use? We haven't done anything along those lines before (hell, we didn't have antivirus until last year). I just want to use it for blocking attachments; we don't care about abilities relating to disclaimers or scanning for certain language/words. Any opinions would help. Thanks! Matt -Original Message- From: Waters, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus Jennifer, Most everyone has already hit on the obvious, most of us use the auto-update feature from the A/V product of our choosing. Then we go the extra step and use some sort of filtering, be it at the fire wall or just simple attachment blocking in our e-mail server A/V product. Here I block .exe;.vbs;.eml;.shs;.lnk attachments from even getting through the e-mail server. Take what has happened to your site up the ladder as a reason to put all this stuff in place! You might get some resistance, and even some complaints, however every time one of these things happens the efforts you have made will be seen and will be appreciated. TrueSecure www.trusecure.com has some good white papers on what types of attachments you should be, or at least thinking about blocking. Oh, the other thing we did was, well we threw IIS right out the window!! Good Luck Jeffrey R. Waters Senior Systems Engineer Information Technology, Hanover County -Original Message- From: Jennifer Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 6:10 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: today's admin backwards virus I was just noticing that most of the gurus of the list had plenty of time to respond to the list regarding various questions. Am I missing something? I have been updating virus software, scanning mailboxes, patching iis/owa servers etc. all night. We were hit externally, but we only had to restore one webserver (although it was similiar to a slightly compressed support.microsoft.com). Is there some secret to this sh*t that you are keeping from me regarding quick draw administration or is this something you pawn off to others? I will compensate for information. (Depending on validity.) I'm not jealous or bitter, btw...not. Jennifer Baker Fluke Corporation http://www.fluke.com http://www.flukenetworks.com mailto:[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] _ 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
RE: today's admin backwards virus
That is a side benefit, for sure. And that is exactly the sort of information I was looking for. My intent here really is to gather as much information as possible from people already using various products. We could have really used that sort of information before we purchased Arcserve two years ago. At the time we were using very old backup tape drives that were no longer working with NTBackup, but worked fine with Arcserve. However, when we moved to Exchange instead of Netscape Messaging Server, we discovered that Arcserve wasn't too friendly (plus we now had a new tape drive that would operate with NTBackup). I'm trying to pull this organization out of the technological stone ages and into the present, but I also have a lot to learn along the way. So, again, any help on what the benefits of one filtering system over another, in your expertise as Exchange admins, would be most helpful. Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 12:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus 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. Our policy was that any user could request a message be released to them, at which point we (the admins) would review the message on a threat basis only and release at our discretion. A nice side benefit of this policy was that even though we were not policing the content of our incoming mail (impossible with 20,000+ recipients) the users were under the impression that we may have been. So they were telling their buddies to stop sending them porn, executables, etc for fear that they were being watched. Eric On Wed, 19 Sep 2001 12:07:05 -0400, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, there's a fundamental problem we have here; we're a public library, and freedom to write and receive email here is not to be impinged in any way. Even in blocking certain attachment types, I'm kind of stepping over the line. So, in terms of filtering for any virus-related terminology, I can probably get away with using software that filters for language. But, I will be told by management to turn it off if we attempt to do anything that restricts anything else. That's why I mentioned that it was not of great concern. Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 12:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus Blocking for certain words is an important part of filtering for viruses in my opinion. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax:(360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 9:00 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus So, does anyone have a strong opinion on what filtering software to use? We haven't done anything along those lines before (hell, we didn't have antivirus until last year). I just want to use it for blocking attachments; we don't care about abilities relating to disclaimers or scanning for certain language/words. Any opinions would help. Thanks! Matt -Original Message- From: Waters, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus Jennifer, Most everyone has already hit on the obvious, most of us use the auto-update feature from the A/V product of our choosing. Then we go the extra step and use some sort of filtering, be it at the fire wall or just simple attachment blocking in our e-mail server A/V product. Here I block .exe;.vbs;.eml;.shs;.lnk attachments from even getting through the e-mail server. Take what has happened to your site up the ladder as a reason to put all this stuff in place! You might get some resistance, and even some complaints, however every time one of these things happens the efforts you have made will be seen and will be appreciated. TrueSecure www.trusecure.com has some good white papers on what types of attachments you should be, or at least thinking about blocking. Oh, the other thing we did was, well we threw IIS right out the window!! Good Luck Jeffrey R. Waters Senior Systems Engineer Information Technology, Hanover County -Original Message- From: Jennifer Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 6:10 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: today's admin backwards virus I was just noticing that most
RE: today's admin backwards virus
Ken, We use Groupshield here as well, and we do have it quarantining those messages that contain virus-infected attachments. I was not aware of any ability to actually block attachment types through Groupshield, or am I reading you wrong? Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 2:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus No, Webshield places the messages in a Quarantine folder and can be viewed with Notepad there. Blocked messages go into a Blocked folder. Groupshield is set up to place them in a quarantine database. Notices are sent to the administrator so that we can first see that a message has been stopped and second that several messages may suddenly be being stopped. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax:(360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Avi Smith-Rapaport [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:18 AM To: Powell, Ken Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus You have it set up to send all attatchments to administrator email box? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 2:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus Good points Eric. That is exactly what we are doing with NAI's Webshield SMTP. I should have mentioned that we are quarantining rather than blocking in the true sense. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax:(360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 9:29 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus 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. Our policy was that any user could request a message be released to them, at which point we (the admins) would review the message on a threat basis only and release at our discretion. A nice side benefit of this policy was that even though we were not policing the content of our incoming mail (impossible with 20,000+ recipients) the users were under the impression that we may have been. So they were telling their buddies to stop sending them porn, executables, etc for fear that they were being watched. Eric On Wed, 19 Sep 2001 12:07:05 -0400, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, there's a fundamental problem we have here; we're a public library, and freedom to write and receive email here is not to be impinged in any way. Even in blocking certain attachment types, I'm kind of stepping over the line. So, in terms of filtering for any virus-related terminology, I can probably get away with using software that filters for language. But, I will be told by management to turn it off if we attempt to do anything that restricts anything else. That's why I mentioned that it was not of great concern. Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 12:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus Blocking for certain words is an important part of filtering for viruses in my opinion. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax:(360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 9:00 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus So, does anyone have a strong opinion on what filtering software to use? We haven't done anything along those lines before (hell, we didn't have antivirus until last year). I just want to use it for blocking attachments; we don't care about abilities relating to disclaimers or scanning for certain language/words. Any opinions would help. Thanks! Matt -Original Message- From: Waters, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus Jennifer, Most everyone has already hit on the obvious, most of us use the auto-update feature from the A/V product of our choosing. Then we go the extra step and use some sort of filtering, be it at the fire wall or just simple attachment blocking in our e-mail server A/V product. Here I block .exe;.vbs;.eml
RE: New Virus / Worm ??
Look here under Removal Instructions: http://vil.nai.com/vil/virusSummary.asp?virus_k=99209 Matt Hoffman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 3:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Virus / Worm ?? you got a link for where they're mentioned? I looked at nai.com and at sybari.com sophos.com and can't find anything about them. maybe i'm just blind. -Michèle Immigration site: http://LadySun1969.tripod.com Our new 2001 Miata: http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley Tiggercam: http://www.tiggercam.co.uk - Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering? Well, I think so Brain, but what if we stick to the seat covers? - -Original Message- From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 3:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Virus / Worm ?? They are mentioned in the NAI website. I've also seen mention of WAV and COM files. -Peter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 12:37 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Virus / Worm ?? has anybody seen anything Official about the .eml files? I've just heard anecdotal evidence about them. -Michèle Immigration site: http://LadySun1969.tripod.com Our new 2001 Miata: http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley Tiggercam: http://www.tiggercam.co.uk - Why do they put pictures of criminals up in the Post Office? What are we supposed to do . . . write to these men? Why don't they just put their pictures on the postage stamps so the mailmen could look for them while they delivered the mail? - -Original Message- From: Daniel Deward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 3:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Virus / Worm ?? If you block EXE's there is no need to wait for updates. For more information, visit http://www.cmsconnect.com Dan -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 3:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Virus / Worm ?? Yes, NAI released an extra.dat Still waiting for trend to put out an update. Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 Phone - (513) 556-9076 Fax - (513) 556-2042 -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 2:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Virus / Worm ?? Does anyone have any more info on this?? Does NAI have an update? I can't get through to them. Thanks Russell -Original Message- From: John Bricher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 12:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Virus / Worm ?? On the servers that were infected at our company, we found a mmc.exe that was running in c:\winnt. This appeared to be regenerating the readme.eml files. We killed the process, deleted the file, and deleted the .eml files. This appears to have worked for now. Not sure how to stop it from happening again. John Bricher Windows NT Engineer Cybear, Inc. 561-999-3549 [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] _ 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
Potentially Corrupt Personal Folder?
I've got a small problem with one of our users' personal folder: not everything in it will import into Exchange (Exch. 5.5, SP4). This user is the last of ours still using PST's, and I was hoping to get him up on our Exchange server. After having finally convinced him that it was a good thing, I go to import his PST and it blows up in my face. Specifically, I get no error numbers with this problem - just a message that says that the files could not be copied. This applies to some email, most of his calendar events, and all tasks. I've not been able to find any Q articles specifically relating to this, but I was hoping someone else might have seen this before. Thanks! Matt Hoffman _ 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: Potentially Corrupt Personal Folder?
Using Outlook for the procedure (it's always worked in the past perfectly). I did attempt to move most of the data over by hand, and it worked for some of the items, but the majority would not copy over. Especially irritating were the problems with the calendar, as this user has meetings and so on scheduled into the next century, practically. I'll just try scanpst I suppose and see if anything comes of it. Thanks! Matt Hoffman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 4:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Potentially Corrupt Personal Folder? The obvious answer is to run scanpst on it 5-6 times and then re-try. Are you using ExMerge or Outlook to try and import the data? If Outlook, can you manually copy items from PST to Inbox (drag-and-drop)? I've had a similar situation in the past and I had to bypass the import process for some of the data. Eric On Tue, 18 Sep 2001 16:35:59 -0400, Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've got a small problem with one of our users' personal folder: not everything in it will import into Exchange (Exch. 5.5, SP4). This user is the last of ours still using PST's, and I was hoping to get him up on our Exchange server. After having finally convinced him that it was a good thing, I go to import his PST and it blows up in my face. Specifically, I get no error numbers with this problem - just a message that says that the files could not be copied. This applies to some email, most of his calendar events, and all tasks. I've not been able to find any Q articles specifically relating to this, but I was hoping someone else might have seen this before. Thanks! Matt Hoffman _ 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: God Bless America
Same here, except for a few stations trying to gouge the public. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 2:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: God Bless America Not here - $1.89 just like yesterday and the day before that. -Ben- -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 8:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: God Bless America I heard it gas up to $5/gallon in some places. One would think we're in Eurpoe. BTW, AFAIK we're still at normal gas prices here in Maryland (DC/Baltimore suburbs). And the grocery stores were, if anything, less crowded than normal. M - Original Message - From: John Allhiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 1:24 AM Subject: RE: God Bless America I agree, although Thomas Paine didn't have to spend $126 to fill his Tahoe up at the QuikTrip. The gouging started Tuesday night in the Heartland. John Allhiser -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jennifer Baker Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 12:05 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: God Bless America http://www.fathermag.com/US_Constitution/01st_amendment.shtml as long as the Exchange list owners allow it, you are s.o.l On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Kim Cameron wrote: i appreciate that Thomas Paine has subbed to the list and is dispensing wisdom, but can we cut the monotheistic references, referrals, and submissions? i find it unintellectual to invoke the names of deities to avert the calamities of man. perhaps there is a monotheist discussion list somewhere, where they might ponder and relish the unbelievable fact that it took 226 years for this email to post to the list. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Guy Stewart Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: God Bless America THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Thomas Paine 1776 _ 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] _ 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: Analysis (was: Terrible disasters...)
Most of downtown Cleveland is being evacuated as well. The mayor here says that a plane that was reportedly hijacked was held here in a secured area of the airport. The plane has been evacuated and security experts are searching the plane now. Another plane that was also reported as being a potential hijacking victim was turned away from our airspace and supposedly was over Toledo at last notice. I think most major cities out there are evacuating their downtowns and mobilizing their emergency personnel. -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 11:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Analysis (was: Terrible disasters...) I agree, but short of martial law, (ever been to Guatemala?) what can you do? Freedom comes at a price. I don't mean to get into an Ayn Rand-ian argument with anyone, because it all comes down to a matter of degree. The price today is more expensive and dear than most were ready to pay. A side note: Downtown Kansas City is currently blocked off in certain areas. Government buildings are being evacuated. How much will this cost the U.S. and other nations in downtime? John Allhiser MCSE CCNA Network Engineer Business Men's Assurance -Original Message- From: Benjamin Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Analysis (was: Terrible disasters...) On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, John Allhiser wrote: If we step back a moment from the horrific events happening, we realize that the world has changed abruptly this morning. I hate to be callous, but the only thing that has changed is public perception. People have been pointing out how vulnerable a crowded city is to any kind of attack or disaster for decades. People have been pointing out how vulnerable the USA is to terrorist attack for at least twenty years. No analyst in this field would be surprised that this occurred. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity | or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any | kind. | _ 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: Haiku Friday
Haiku is nice, but Do you not have enough work To do on Friday? Matt -Original Message- From: Denis Baldwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Computers give hell To all that dare to touch them Goddamn old printers Denis Denis A. Baldwin (A+/MCP/I-Net+/Net+/CCA/CIW) Network Administrator, CAE, Inc. 810-231-9373, ext. 229 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Haiku Friday Poetry gives wings To that part in all of us Dormant due to work. - Original Message - From: LSeltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:27 AM Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Why have poetry? Must it always be funny? Was that funny? -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Haiku Friday Haiku poetry three lines of five, seven and five syllables. Easy. - Original Message - From: Mike Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:12 AM Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Poorly is the word, but it was not a bad try. It ain't easy, eh? Mike Morrison NT/SMS/Exchange Administrator Ben Jerry's Homemade, Inc. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Haiku Friday my first haiku try this is not an easy feat I think I did poor -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Denis Baldwin Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 5:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Haiku Friday Friday it is here Haiku can begin again Send in your words now Denis Denis A. Baldwin (A+/MCP/I-Net+/Net+/CCA/CIW) Network Administrator, CAE, Inc. 810-231-9373, ext. 229 [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] _ 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] This e-mail is intended only for the addressee named above. This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to retain, read, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. In addition, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this communication is strictly prohibited. The sender of this message does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message that arise as a result of e-mail transmission. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. _ 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:
RE: Haiku Friday
This is funny, yes A hoot, laff, a knee slapper I am rolling now -Original Message- From: LSeltzer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 2:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Haiku Friday ha haha haha hahahaha ha haha haha ha haha! -Original Message- From: Busby, Jacob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 11:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Why have poetry? Must it always be funny? Was that funny? Haiku is nice, but Do you not have enough work To do on Friday? All these Haiku Q's! Why not add Haiku Friday as FAQ appendix? _ 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] This e-mail is intended only for the addressee named above. This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to retain, read, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. In addition, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this communication is strictly prohibited. The sender of this message does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message that arise as a result of e-mail transmission. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. _ 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]
