Happy New Year All.
Just a quick question for the new year. I am running exchange 5.5 on an NT
Server , i know i am upgrading soon 8-)
Ok, I have 2 offices A and B, A being head office. Both are connected via
site connector. Now Office B has been shut down and the server is now
offline. I have
: site connector question.
Happy New Year All.
Just a quick question for the new year. I am running exchange 5.5 on an NT
Server , i know i am upgrading soon 8-)
Ok, I have 2 offices A and B, A being head office. Both are connected via
site connector. Now Office B has been shut down and the server
You mean Office B will never come back online?
-Original Message-
From: Vas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 5:13 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: site connector question.
Happy New Year All.
Just a quick question for the new year. I am running exchange
Thanks
- Original Message -
From: Ward, Stuart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 1:18 PM
Subject: RE: site connector question.
ah the wonders of technology... apologies for the resend - was rejected
the
first time:
remove
Has anyone heard anything about this company called CITCO (not the oil
and gas Citgo), but CITCO Group - http://www.citco.com/
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
Nope
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: OT: company question
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 09:21:41 -0500
Has anyone heard anything about this company called CITCO (not the oil
and gas Citgo
. december 2003 04:40
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: Dumb question - why OWA cannot get to public folder contacts?
Ever since the early days - I always thought at some point, MS would make the OWA get
to all the public folders like outlook (be able to send email by picking a public
folder contact list
Ever since the early days - I always thought at some point, MS would
make the OWA get to all the public folders like outlook (be able to send
email by picking a public folder contact list) but alas, Ex2k3 still has
no access to a public folder contact list. Grr.
I know OWA is meant to be quick,
that is the way I understand it.
- Matt
-Original Message-
From: Clemens, Rick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 4:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OWA Design Question
Exchange 2000 SP3
Windows 2000 SP4
I am sitting here reading the PDF Using Microsoft
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bailey, Matthew
Posted At: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 8:28 AM
Posted To: Exchange Discussion
Conversation: OWA Design Question
Subject: RE: OWA Design Question
If you publish OWA through ISA, all you need to open outbound to the
internet is 80
for
instance) to proxy the connection from the DMZ.
-Original Message-
From: Bailey, Matthew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 9:28 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA Design Question
If you publish OWA through ISA, all you need to open outbound to the
internet
: RE: OWA Design Question
It is my understanding that even if I publish OWA through ISA I still
have to open 389, 88, and 53(if we don't use host files) to our network
for authentication. So it seems that I will just save my self from
opening ports for GC Queries and RPC Traffic.
-Original
-
From: Clemens, Rick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 9:34 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA Design Question
It is my understanding that even if I publish OWA through ISA I still
have to open 389, 88, and 53(if we don't use host files) to our network
Do the users eventually get a case of keyphobia? :)
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 9:36 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA Design Question
You can use ISA. It's not that hard to set up and works well
scenario I have to open 389, 3268, 88, 53, 135, 1024+
or statically map the RPC service Port. This seems easy enough to do
but it sucks having to swiss cheese the firewall. Of course Microsoft
recommends the Advance Firewall Scenario (ISA Server)
My question is has anyone setup ISA in a DMZ
: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 4:45 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: VB Question
Please keep in mind, that the PD Wizard of VB, does more that just
dependencies files.
It will register the NEWLY made/included COM object(s) in the registry
for
proper operation of the object(s) that need
Hi all. I am trying to understand why a piece of VB code works on my PC
but doesn't do anything on a server.
All I want it to do is to show me the names of all COM+ applications.
I compile it into an EXE and run on my PC and it works great. Then I
copy it to one of my servers and run it there -
does comadmin.dll exist on the server?
-Original Message-
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 9:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OT: VB Question
Hi all. I am trying to understand why a piece of VB code works on my PC
but doesn't do
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OT: VB Question
Hi all. I am trying to understand why a piece of VB code works on my PC
but doesn't do anything on a server.
All I want it to do is to show me the names of all COM+ applications.
I compile it into an EXE and run on my PC and it works great. Then I
copy
Just checked - yes. Under c:\winnt\system32\com
-Original Message-
From: Scott Weston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 11:21 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: VB Question
does comadmin.dll exist on the server?
-Original Message-
From
Thanks, will try.
-Original Message-
From: Fred Skrotzki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 12:27 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: VB Question
Build is as a distributable package. the exe must need some dependency
that exists on the server build
12:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: VB Question
Just checked - yes. Under c:\winnt\system32\com
-Original Message-
From: Scott Weston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 11:21 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: VB Question
does comadmin.dll
Weston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: VB Question
Basically you are missing the required libraries. Do as previous poster
suggested and use the packager wizard to include all dependencies.
Probably
the vb libraries aren't
, 2003 2:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: VB Question
Thanks. My goal is to create just one .exe file and be able to run it on
the server. Just like the AutoAcceptConf.exe file (can be downloaded
from sourceforge.com). One can copy that file to a server and then run
it. It runs fine on my
My answer is 200. I will have Outlook published in a Citrix farm at this
remote location. 200 people will access outlook from that site. The
Outlook application will be published on Terminal Servers (Citrix). From
the servers Outlook will need to find an exchange server 1 of which is at
my
What are those factores. I do not want my users to have an Outlook
experience as if they were accessing it online over a 40K dialup
connection.
Thanks
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web
What was the question///?
-- Rev. Kevinm WLKMMAS, Exchange MVP
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Dietz
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 7:42 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Site connector question
My answer is 200. I
PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Site connector question
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 07:41:56 -0800
My answer is 200. I will have Outlook published in a Citrix farm at this
remote location. 200 people will access outlook from
Currently I have a single Exchange Server 2K in my main office -
I have an office opening remotely in 2 weeks -
Do I add an exchange server into my organization at this remote site? Is
it to speed access to the GAL or does it have a copy of the priv and pub
databases.
The connection to the main
How many users at the remote site?
From: Kevin Dietz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Site connector question
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 11:42:32 -0800
Currently I have a single Exchange Server 2K in my main
Subject: Site connector question
Currently I have a single Exchange Server 2K in my main office -
I have an office opening remotely in 2 weeks -
Do I add an exchange server into my organization at this remote site?
Depends on whether you need one.
Is it to speed access to the GAL or does
I have been using Trend for years but I am currently with an org that uses
Norton for Exchange and they have been having problems for quite some
time. There are 5 servers in one site all with SP4 on NT4 SP6.
The question I need answered is does Trend support single instance
scanning of messages
Why not just setup a relay server with Trend running on it. Four less
machines to worry about.
From: Sean Faust [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Virus Scanning Question MAPI/AVAPI
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 12:24
The relay box here is SendMail and this will be here long after I am gone,
SendMail then sends to the 4 Exchange boxes using DNS to round robin to
the Internet Mail Connectors installed on each 5.5 box.One of the
questions is when is SIS broken in Exchange 5.5/2000 when an attachement
is
Both of these options in Exchange 5.5 are very vague. What is the true
definition of these two options and is it truly a confirmation that the
recipient Read or Received the email.
I have heard different stories from both Microsoft and other Exchange
Admins. Whats your hearsay on this?
Subject: Question about Email Notification
Both of these options in Exchange 5.5 are very vague. What is the true
definition of these two options and is it truly a confirmation that the
recipient Read or Received the email.
I have heard different stories from both Microsoft and other Exchange
And if your client suppresses read receipts, the sender will never get any
notifications at all!
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 10:45 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Question about Email Notification
Exactly. That's what I do.
-Original Message-
From: David, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 7:49 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Question about Email Notification
And if your client suppresses read receipts, the sender will never get any
, 2003 9:41 AM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: Question about Email Notification
Subject: Question about Email Notification
Both of these options in Exchange 5.5 are very vague. What is the true
definition of these two options and is it truly a confirmation that the
recipient Read or Received
to block read receipts.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 10:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Question about Email Notification
Not hearsay, but long term experience with enterprise e
Question
I wanted to run this question by the experts to see if I could get a
definitive answer. Our Private Store database reached it's 16GB limit
and, on looking at the files, we found that the Priv.edb file was only
12.4GB. Can anyone tell me how Exchange 2000 figures the 16GB for the
size
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sander Van
Butzelaar
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 11:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Information Store Size Question
You are looking in Explorer at your priv.edb with exchange running or
stopped? Stop exchange and see the real file size.
Sander
: Information Store Size Question
Hmmm. Exchange services running but the store was dismounted. Do I need
all services stopped to get accurate size or just STORE.EXE?
What about the priv.stm file? I noticed that adding it to the EDB file
was just over 16GB. Should I be looking there also
2003 06:52
Posted To: Swynk Exchange (30 days)
Conversation: Information Store Size Question
Subject: Information Store Size Question
I wanted to run this question by the experts to see if I could get a
definitive answer. Our Private Store database reached it's 16GB limit
and, on looking at the files
Subject: RE: Information Store Size Question
The 16GB limit applies to the size of the EDB and STM files added
together.
Also, see this:
http://hellomate.typepad.com/exchange/2003/09/temporarily_inc.html
Neil
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
You're welcome!
-Original Message-
From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 8:38 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Information Store Size Question
Thanks for the information and the tip. I had found the same information in
the MSKB and used
Outlook 2003, Exchange 2003
Every now and then, some emails will have a question mark on the
first line of the body of the message. The sender did not put it
there. This only seems to happen on internal emails, not on emails
received from the Internet. There seems to be no other rhyme or
reason
I have spent all day trying to achieve what seems to be a simple task.
I have Symantec Mail Security 4.0 for Exchange installed on a front-end
Exchange 2000 server. Inbound mail first comes to this server and then
is relayed to the appropriate back-end.
So I have been trying to create a simple
Maybe it's pointing to a different port
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Question about Symantec Mail Security 4.0 for Exchange
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 16:42:22 -0500
I have spent all day
: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 4:46 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Question about Symantec Mail Security 4.0 for Exchange
Maybe it's pointing to a different port
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED
Really. Hmmm Never worked with the stuff. Ask Symantec I guess. It's their
stuff not really an Exchange issue is it then.
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Question about Symantec Mail
DNS namespace is
different from the SMTP suffix specified in the default recipient
policy. I think it is confusing the hell out of Symantec.
-Original Message-
From: Fyodorov, Andrey
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 4:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Question about Symantec Mail
DEFINITELY hire a consultant. I've actually been in this situation
already and it turned into a 3 day nightmare with Microsoft Tech Support.
The most important thing to know is that Microsoft does not recommend an
in place upgrade of Exchange 5.5 and it can potentially be the absolute
worst
and not affect exchange.
-Original Message-
From: Crista Murphy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 7:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
DEFINITELY hire a consultant. I've actually been in this situation
already and it turned into a 3
Of Crista Murphy
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 5:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
DEFINITELY hire a consultant. I've actually been in this situation
already and it turned into a 3 day nightmare with Microsoft Tech
Support.
The most important thing to know
, Exchange MVP
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Weston
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 5:32 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
If I read the post right he isn't wanting to do an inplace upgrade of
exchange
Hi all,
Scott is correct, i'm not upgrading the NT4 box with Exchange 5.5 on it.
This will remain on the NT4 BDC as is, in a mixed mode situation. I have
the new kit as the PCD now and will upgrade it to Win2K. Then install AD
with the new domain name. I believe now the netbios domain name will be
AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
Hi all,
Scott is correct, i'm not upgrading the NT4 box with Exchange 5.5 on it.
This will remain on the NT4 BDC as is, in a mixed mode situation. I have
the new kit as the PCD now and will upgrade it to Win2K. Then install AD
I have a W2K domain domain.local
I will add a SBS2000 to it with exchange 2000
This exchange 2000 should be the mail server for domain.com
1- How this can be when AD works on domain.local
2- should SBS be a member server or a controller
Thanks for your help
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, at 10:36am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1- How this can be when AD works on domain.local
Email addresses in Exchange do not have to have any connection to your AD
domain. I usually just add the Internet domain as an SMTP address, and make
it the primary address.
2- should
: Thursday, October 30, 2003 11:33 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Quick Question
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, at 10:36am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1- How this can be when AD works on domain.local
Email addresses in Exchange do not have to have any connection to your AD
domain. I usually just
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 11:49 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Quick Question
You're correct. SBS can not be added to an existing domain. It must be the
one and only domain controller.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
The Key School, Annapolis
, October 30, 2003 11:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Quick Question
If you can't add SBS to a domain
Can you add a SBS as a controller to SBS
If it's only one controller there is no redundancy
If yes, Can you add a regular W2K server as a controller to SBS
-Original Message
can we setup a group of users in Exchange that are isolated to a outlook
address book that they can only see. As well as restrict delivery only
between their group and restrict inbound/outbound internet email?
He currently has a single group. Exchnage 2000 I think he can but would have
to
: Question from client
can we setup a group of users in Exchange that are isolated to a outlook
address book that they can only see. As well as restrict delivery only
between their group and restrict inbound/outbound internet email?
He currently has a single group. Exchnage 2000 I think he can
]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Question from client
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 13:27:01 -0500
yes we can do that...
_
John Bowles
Exchange Engineer
OIG/HHS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original
-ticked it but I guess the only way to test is to wait for a failure [:-)
-Original Message-
From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 5:00 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exch 5.5 Routing Question
GWART! :-)
Neil
-Original Message
: Quick Question
You're correct. SBS can not be added to an existing domain. It must be
the one and only domain controller.
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The
Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
Discussions
Subject: Question from client
can we setup a group of users in Exchange that are isolated to a outlook
address book that they can only see. As well as restrict delivery only
between their group and restrict inbound/outbound internet email?
He currently has a single group. Exchnage
E2K I was thinking that can be done but he would have to have another group
created and also use a SMTP connector for the internet part
From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Question from
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 3:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Question from client
E2K I was thinking
. I
am also thinking he has to point those users mail to do the smarthost route.
I will repost when I have all of what he want to accomplish.
From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Question
Hi all,
I am in the middle of an upgrade to windows 2000 server from an NT 4.0
domain. I plan to run in mixed mode then install exchange 2000, before
transfering the mail over from 5.5, here's what i have so far. Sorry if
its a bit newbie.
I have 1 NT 4 server (sp6) running Exchange 5.5 (sp4)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 3:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Question from client
Correct on the address list part. His big concern was the routing of
internal only for mail
: Thursday, October 30, 2003 4:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Just a quick question
Hi all,
I am in the middle of an upgrade to windows 2000 server from an NT 4.0
domain. I plan to run in mixed mode then install exchange 2000, before
transfering the mail over from 5.5, here's what i have so
Would you know a good one?
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 5:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
That's a lot of questions in one post. May I suggest that you hire a
consultant?
Ed
Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
Would you know a good one?
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 5:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
That's a lot of questions in one post. May I
People that know Exchange?
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 6:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
I know a lot of them!
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
People that know Exchange?
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 6:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Just a quick question
I know a lot of them!
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
GWART! :-)
Neil
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: 28 October 2003 20:39
Posted To: Swynk Exchange (30 days)
Conversation: Exch 5.5 Routing Question
Subject: Re: Exch 5.5 Routing Question
I believe the Qwart file takes care of that in 5.5 which
Hello,
Exchange 5.5 SP4 on W2K SP4 boxes. 1 ORG, 3 Sites (A, B, C) in three
different cities across N.A.
I have 2 x400 connectors setup in each location. Each site is setup the same
in that they all have two x400 connectors, each going to one of the other
sites. If the VPN link between Site A
I believe the Qwart file takes care of that in 5.5 which was elliminated in
2000.
From: Woods, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Exch 5.5 Routing Question
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 12:08:19 -0800
Hello
We run split brained DNS here. We have Windows 2000 server for our public zones and as
we just upgraded, Windows 2003 DNS for internal zones.
Our internal DNS is configured (I believe correctly) to do root lookups for all zones
except for the ones that we control. If appears to do the fine for
Running Exchange 2000 - outlook 2000, outlook-xp, etc.
Is there a way to setup a clients mailbox that will only receive mail?
We don't want to clients to be able to send from that account.
Ron Pennell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pennell, Ronald B.
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 10:02 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Outlook Question
Running Exchange 2000 - outlook 2000, outlook-xp, etc.
Is there a way to setup a clients mailbox that will only receive mail?
We don't want to clients
AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: [SPAM-FILT] - RE: NDR Question - Number of numbers in MIME From
exceeds maximum threshold
Make a distribution list that goes nowhere and put those email addresses
that you are getting spammed with there. Acts as a blackhole, eating up
junk and never gives
Hi everyone,
I was wondering , if there is a way I can stop NDR to senders and still have copies of
NDRs sent to a mailbox within same exchange organization ? I looked all KB but
couldn't find a way to do this. I'm running Exchange 2k-SP3.
Any help or direction in this regards will be greatly
Discussions
Subject: NDR Question
Hi everyone,
I was wondering , if there is a way I can stop NDR to senders and still have
copies of NDRs sent to a mailbox within same exchange organization ? I
looked all KB but couldn't find a way to do this. I'm running Exchange
2k-SP3.
Any help or direction
(as we already do now) in a separate exchange
mailbox.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 12:40 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: [SPAM-FILT] - RE: NDR Question - Number of numbers in MIME From exceeds
maximum threshold
!
http://secondlife.com/ss/?u=b4ebbfdd6af98a027fa7e89a86c55a68
-Original Message-
From: Gagrani, Kishore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:44 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: [SPAM-FILT] - RE: NDR Question - Number of numbers in MIME
From exceeds
HI Everyone,
We are running Ad in our environment with Exchange 2000. We have 2 AD
servers
in the same site and only 1 server has all FSMO roles (we havent gotten a
chance to move them yet).
For some reason when one of our DC's failed (the one with all the FSMO
roles), our other DC did not
Thanks Bob.
Kishore
-Original Message-
From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 12:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: [SPAM-FILT] - RE: [SPAM-FILT] - RE: NDR Question - Number of numbers in MIME
From exceeds maximum threshold - Number of numbers
PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Active Directory/Exchange 2000 Failover Question
HI Everyone,
We are running Ad in our environment with Exchange 2000. We have 2 AD
servers in the same site and only 1 server has all FSMO roles (we havent
gotten a chance to move them yet).
For some reason
Hi There,
Thank for the reply. Yes it is, but I think I found the answer and the
solution. Its documented here:
http://www.winnetmag.com/MicrosoftExchangeOutlook/Article/ArticleID/25332/MicrosoftExchangeOutlook_25332.html
This did the trick nicely by allowing me to increase the DS auery
Do any of you smart exchange gurus know how much bandwidth does a MS
PPTP connection and a MAPI connection to a exchange server be per user?
I have a T1, and the remote office has SDSL 1.1 with a IP Sec tunnel to
the T1.
Just need a estimation of user to bandwidth ratio.
Thanks, Eric
Is that KB or kbps?
-Original Message-
From: Kevinm [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:06 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Bandwidth question with MAPI and PPTP
I always try to allocate 20k per active session. If you are running
outlook 2003 against
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Bandwith question with MAPI and PPTP
Do any of you smart exchange gurus know how much bandwidth does a MS PPTP
connection and a MAPI connection to a exchange server be per user?
I have a T1, and the remote office has SDSL 1.1 with a IP Sec tunnel to the
T1.
Just
Discussions
Subject: RE: Bandwidth question with MAPI and PPTP
I always try to allocate 20k per active session. If you are running outlook
2003 against exchange 2003 in cached mode, that number goes down to a single
digit.
-- Rev. Kevinm WLKMMAS, Exchange MVP
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Bandwith question with MAPI and PPTP
The load of a PPTP connection depends on what you're sending through it.
Rule of thumb for MAPI Outlook sessions is to plan for 3 to 4 KBps per light
user, 5 to 7 KBps per moderate user, and 10 or more KBps per heavy user
question with MAPI and PPTP
That's very conservative.
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 Kevinm
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:06
1 - 100 of 1901 matches
Mail list logo
