Besides the technical limitations on the PST (remember the P stands for
Personal, that means you're responsible not the mail admin), you should ask
your legal department or attorney how they feel about documents that are
retained for long periods of time. See what they have to say. If they don't
Wouldn't this be more of a business decision than a technical one? Obviously
there are limits that need to be in place. If you set prohibit send and
receive at 50MB on the mailboxes, then you should set the IMS lower. Other
than that, the question is, what do your users need to send and receive?
I'll have to disagree. If your business is graphic design or something
similar, then you have a real need to send and receive large attachments.
Your design should reflect your need. If I need to have bigger servers,
mailboxes and or internet connections to meet these needs then you should be
able
Take a look at using Terminal Server or Citrix and leave the mail where it
belongs. On the Exchange server.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 4:28 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Recommendation
That's because she's a minion of CJ.
A MOS +BP no less.
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Pochedley [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 2:31 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT)
>
> Michèle,
>
> How did you know it was my
If you need to keep the sent mail where everyone can read it bcc it to a PF
or the mailbox.
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 4:03 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: responding from an exchange group
>
> Y
No you should send all porn to me so I can verify if it business applicable.
Ken,
The one thing you need to watch for when you quarantine the mail is that NAI
does not send it back through the scanning routine when you go to send it
on. I know of one person who was burned this way.
> -Origin
: (360) 397-6121 x4658
> Fax: (360) 759-6001
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 1:27 PM
> To: Powell, Ken
> Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus
>
>
> No you should send
This is a good start if you want to 100% stop any virus. You should also
turn disable any non-fixed drives on all you workstations and servers. Any
VPN connections should be terminated as well, just in case.
-Original Message-
From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Fr
I feel your pain.
http://openrbl.org/
Gives you multiple queries on one page to see who has you listed.
-Original Message-
From: Barry Patterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 12:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Spam listings
http://www.sendm
I asked John, who is the author of the RFC his opinion. Here is his
response.
> -Original Message-
> From: John C Klensin [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:43 PM
> To: Schwartz, Jim
> Subject: Re: RFC2821
>
> The answer, u
That would depend on the size and complexity of your environment, what types
of attachments that you need to allow into your company and how sensitive
your company is to downtime due to a virus outbreak. Many of the anti virus
vendors now have Consoles that can manage your deployments across multi
m
> someone dedicated
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 8:21 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: AV! a full time job?
>
>
> That would depend on the size and complexity of yo
Check the shoulder boards. That bird on my shoulder doesn't mean I'm a
pirate.
> -Original Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 8:27 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: AV! a full time job?
>
> Motivated,
No, he is looking to increase his empire. Let him hire another admin and
then use him for your own purposes when he's not working on AV. Within 6
months you'll have yourself a minion.
> -Original Message-
> From: Hansen, Eric [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 12
I say bully for him and that you feel that all the Unix/Linux sites are
devoted to hackers and people that waste their time so you're going to block
e-mails from sun.com etc. etc.
> -Original Message-
> From: Doug Hampshire [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 2:34
Richard, I would suggest that you or someone else in your company look into
ASE training.
http://www.compaq.com/certification/na/
> -Original Message-
> From: Tener, Richard [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 12:43 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: R
Fred, if you're new to Exchange and are unsure about what will happen or
exactly what you should do. Call PSS.
> -Original Message-
> From: Fred W. Macondray Jr. [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 3:53 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: ESE98 ?
>
Are you suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder or are you responding
to your own questions?
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 4:19 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Problems Logging on to domai
You too?
"Well, do you have a backup?"
"Yes, but we don't know where the tapes are."
> -Original Message-
> From: Dillon, Jeff [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 5:38 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Top Ten Statements or Phrases - Year 2001
>
Good friggen luck.
It took me a month to get off the last of them. Some of the administrators
of the blackhole lists are totally unresponsive.
http://www.openrbl.org/ is a good lookup source. It lets you check a number
of sites at once.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dustin Krysak [SMTP:[
Amen. The other consideration you should look at is will you filter e-mails
that are really business related, but for whatever reason appear to be spam.
This blocks legitimate mail and could possibly lose you business. Example:
Dear Sirs,
My name is Dick Cheney and I am the President of a 18 yea
This, along with your last question about scanning e-mail, leads me to
believe that your boss is an e-mail Nazi. He wants to know what everyone is
sending and receiving to anyone. Refer him to Ed Crowley's statement, "There
are seldom good technical solutions for behavioral problems."
> -Orig
yris" and
> "fsck" iirc.
>
> Ronni
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 11:39 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Trend e-manager opin
Something like:
Congratulations!!! You've been selected by our steering committee to handle
our AD design and implementation. Our selection was not based just on the
$$$'s you will save us, but due to your experience and understanding. We
look forward to working with you.
(Still can't figure out
The key word there is, supposed. Best bet is to have some sort of forwarding
set up on the old IP address. Some ISP's update their DNS when the Unix
admin wants to take a break from figuring out if he should put the / in
front of the capital S or behind a lower case b.
> -Original Message
Let's see.
1000 user per box. 800MB RAM. No issues here. So I should more than double
my RAM and halve the number of users per box.
And I thought I over engineered servers.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 11:52 AM
Sean, I don't think you saw Andy's sarcasm tags. Maybe the thong he's
wearing distracted you.
On everything else you said I agree.
> -Original Message-
> From: McGilligan, Sean [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 12:38 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject:
For the most part you don't need to keep either of the messages. What I've
been beating people over the head here is that I don't care that you have an
e-mail from 3 years ago stating that we would switch to Fubar Software. If
it's part of meeting, then it needs to be in the meeting minutes. If it
You should look into version control software for better control. It will
also help to cut down on the amount of data you store. One copy vs many
copies of a document. It will also help you track who checked out and made
changes to docs and allow you to revert back quickly to older versions if
nee
The same thing could be said of IBM a number of years back. They were all
about Big Iron and developing what they thought the customer wanted rather
than what the customer really needed.
I still see that attitude in mainframe shops that drives me nuts. For a long
while the mainframe was the only
You work for a bank
What did you really expect?
Candy and flowers?
> -Original Message-
> From: Hunter, Lori [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 11:29 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Haiku Friday
>
> Domain names changing
> The new parents impos
I normally would not cross post this but it does relate to internet mail as
a whole and therefore applies to Exchange 5.5 and 2000.
I had the unfortunate situation recently where a configuration error opened
us up to relaying. Once notified that this was the case, I quickly put a
stop to it. I th
compliant and/or is misconfigured. Fortunately
> it's not Exchange, so we don't get to have yet another round of Microsoft
> bashing. ;)
>
> Once your server has been reconfigured or replaced, you might want to
> thank
> the 'good' Dr. for all fo his help in
TECTED] Sender ok
> 250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipient ok
> 354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by itself
> 250 Ok
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim
>
"." on a line by itself
> 250 Ok
>
> 250 Rset state
> 250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender ok
> 250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipient ok
> 354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by itself
> 250 Ok
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim
&
And if you're scanning all file attachments rather than just files listed.
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:35 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: New Virus outbreak
>
> I believe most of the scan engines (
We took a look at the e500 appliance. It seemed pretty good. High speed, low
drag. Then we saw the price tag and sent it back.
-Original Message-
From: Boehm, Diane M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 2:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Hate to beat a dead
Just be glad that neither of them write documentation for your environment.
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Hyche [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 10:46 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: My Salary(exchange)
>
> Gee, Ya'll sure do talk good.
Obviously you've gone blind from reading Chris Scharff's comment about
wearing a pink sun dress, but when you recover enough of your site you can
look at:
http://www.internic.net
> -Original Message-
> From: Brett Wesoloski [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 1:13 PM
We looked at it for a little bit. High speed, low drag. It's really a
network appliance running on a Linux kernel that does the same thing that
WebShield does. Supposedly rated for 100k messages per hour. We didn't get
too far into it as the price tag was bit large. My biggest complaint about
WebS
The monitoring solution that they are pushing here has a requirement to add
MDAC (v 2.1.2 or higher) to the Exchange (5.5 - SP4) servers in order for
the agent to work properly. Has anyone else installed MDAC or is anyone
aware of any information of why this is a bad idea? My largest concern is
th
abase Drivers ODBC Driver, or the Visual FoxPro
> ODBC
> driver. See Knowledge Base article Q271908 for more information. "
>
> Mike
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thu 3/14/2002 8:57 AM
>
>
> Is the push a "there preference" push or a mandatory push? There are
> monitoring solutions available that do not require agents.
>
> Dave Cook
> Exchange Administrator
> Kutak Rock, LLP
> 402-231-8352
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> -Origina
and is installed with Windows 2000 is 2.5. Exchange 5.5 Sp4 runs fine
> on Windows 2000. I would assume that it would work just fine. However
> all precautions should be taken.
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: T
D on your network over the weekend.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 1:53 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: MDAC on Exchange
>
>
> Excuse me but I should clarify some
nce to test this yet as we
> also have an application that requires MDAC2.6 or later to go on our NT4
> servers. [it's the Bindview Migration re-permissioning agent btw)
>
> I'll probably check it out next week if you can wait.
>
> > -Original Message-
> >
300? Small potatoes. Your IMS will always have a few messages sitting in it
from NDR's, and bounces. You can also adjust the time out values to get rid
of them faster if you like or change the retry rate if that makes you happy.
If I see an outbound queue that is totally empty, then I get worried
I get the ones about holding my...
Never mind.
I used to get them for a while and found that some emails were not getting
to us in a timely manner and then I would get the nasty gram. Look into your
inbound mail and check connections. Do some testing to see if you can
connect via SMTP regularly.
Compaq has a utility called Meatgrinder. They don't let anyone have it of
course, unless you're a Compaq engineer. (Or they accidentally leave the
executable on the server they are testing). See if Dell has a similar one.
It lets you stress any part of the system from the CPU to the drives.
> ---
I'll use the same argument Doug used for the BCC question.
How did you prevent someone from taking a typed memo and making photocopies
of it?
> -Original Message-
> From: Bibel, Laura Y. [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 1:08 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subj
rwarding of an email message.
>
> Since you work for a bank, Im betting that you guys still
> type out memos.
>
>
> Original message
> >Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 13:16:30 -0400
> >From: "Schwartz, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sub
2 12:24 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Prevent the forwarding of an email message.
>
>
> Since you work for a bank, Im betting that you guys still
> type out memos.
>
>
> Original message
> >Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 13:16:30 -0400
> >
The Olds still in the shop?
Jim, check the archives. This topic has been hammered to death. Short answer
is, have you management set the business requirement of how large they need
to get and design to that.
-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, Ap
What about a workflow/compliance application? For example, a message is sent
by user A to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The message needs to be checked for
compliance to state/federal laws. (i.e. can't say guarantee when talking
about investments) The compliance officer then needs to pass the message
along as
ginal Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 11:45 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: I need to send emails as another
>
>
> What about a workflow/compliance application? For example, a
> message is sent
nal Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 11:52 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: I need to send emails as another
>
>
> OK.
> A Dr. wants to send medical records to the CDC or other informational
> ga
Mongo S.O.L.
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 4:28 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Messed up PST
>
> Mongo no backup pst.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
For a minute I thought they finally made a movie about me.
> -Original Message-
> From: David Florea [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 4:04 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Cerification question
>
> Poop. J. C., not J. S..
>
> -Original
Ah, yes. I recall that incident.
If you choose to use a RBL, read very carefully what the criteria is to be
placed on their lists. As Darcy said before, some of these folks block
entire netblocks. There is one or two that I know of that have blocked the
entire Sprintlink netblock. That's something
For WinNT 4.0 in H-node - Q142309 Q119493 is a good article describing the
different node types.
NetBIOS name cache
WINS server - 3 queries 1.5 second timeout.
B-node broadcast - 3 broadcasts with 750ms timeout.
LMHOSTS file
HOSTS file
DNS server
I thought I read somewhere that Win2K reverses t
Hello! [1]
Frankly. I run the mail system for a business. Decisions about who and what
arrives into my mail systems is BUSINESS decision. The folks who run the RBL
systems are technologists. They make TECHNOLOGY decisions. They have no idea
about my business needs so I would never allow them to ma
Many organizations see messaging as a transport system or a communication
system and fail to see the significant body of knowledge that is captured in
the e-mails. The problem arises with this data not being organized into
easily searchable information. Archival solutions are really a patch on top
To be kept in the life style that you wish to become accustomed to.
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice@;pacbell.net]
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: somewhat OT
Who knows? I'd love to retire today. If I can only convince
Amen! You'd be surprised how many times that "important" document isn't
worth the $50.00 charge to their cost center.
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice@;pacbell.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 9:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sent Item
3. Ask the us
t; To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sent Item
>
>
> Woohooo! But why only $50? Seems like it should be $50/hr or something
> like that . . . With a minimum charge, of course!
>
> James Winzenz, MCSE, A+
> Associate Systems Administrator
> InovisTM, former
Blind Carbon Copy.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:rrivera@;elnuevodia.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 8:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: How did I receive this?
I just received an email (and possibly others in my company) but it did not
have a 'To:' (re
There used to be a good white paper written by Compaq and Microsoft called
Managing and Monitoring Microsoft(r) Exchange Server. I can't find it on
either site anymore.
I'll send it to you offline if you would like.
-Original Message-
From: Marshall, Ben F. [mailto:ben.marshall@;usaa.com]
Found it on Active Answers finally. You'll need to register on their site to
get it.
http://tinyurl.com/2p7g
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 11:28 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Performance Moni
The students are employed by the school so it's a business e-mail address
not the student one. They have every right to do what they want.
Yes, you can use the encapsulated x.400 address but in this case I don't
think anyone would make the effort to do that.
-Original Message-
From: Chris
And you forget to bring beer.
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 7:31 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: STORE.EXE loves memory
Seems like I'm always late to the party.
--
You're going to carve up the disks and share spindles with "critcal" servers
running high intensive databases?
Good luck.
-Original Message-
From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 10:52 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: the IBM Shark
We pl
nsen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 12:18 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: the IBM Shark
:p that could be solved with proper planning and good lun management.
-Original Message-----
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December
But they are so shiny...
Quack.
EMC has been working with Oracle closely to do "instant" backups. I haven't
looked too much at the Hitachi SANs and don't know what they are capable of.
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 1
Thirded. The other benefit is the lower costs. A BCV volume for EMC is
essentially a mirror of your existing set of spindles (which are probably
mirrored). The DB is shut down and the mirror is broken and mounted
elsewhere for backup to tape. In order to remount that mirror for the next
day, you'll
Basically it means you're waiting on AD to give Exchange the location of the
mail server the mailbox resides on or what action to do with the mail. It's
waiting on a response from AD.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 11:25 A
Wrong side of The Pond...
-Original Message-
From: Clark, John A (FUSA) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 10:16 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Virus Attack ??
Did someone wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning??? YIKES!!
-Original Messag
OK. Make it so.
I have like 30 domains that we accept mail for. Please give some more
details on EXACTLY what you want to accomplish and we can try to help you
out. Otherwise we're guessing or making stuff up. Some people on this list
have very vivid imaginations and you wouldn't want that.
-
If your management likes Gartner reports, they suggest that the "must move
off 5.5 date" to be 2Q04.
When you think about non-support, you should also factor in that more and
more technical folks are moving to E2K. The list of people that can run a
5.5 organization is going to get shorter and the
I'll have you know that I've obtained the rank of Degenerate, 1st Class.
-Original Message-
From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Group Mail
BTW- I think most of you guys are a bunch of perverts, in c
I guess the point of it would be YMMV. Depending on your traffic patterns,
your need to regulate traffic between sites by size and or times or to
throttle the connection. With E2K you put in your best guess and if it's not
what you need, it's not that hard to change it. We have two main data
cente
Two reasons possible.
An orphaned object still exists for that address in the DL that they are
sending to or one of the users still has the user listed as a delegate.
-Original Message-
From: Olds, Dominic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 9:29 AM
To: Exchange Discuss
Ding! I'm sorry, you've already spent that money and my airline tickets are
non-refundable. Don't forget that one.
-Original Message-
From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 2:49 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN
The stra
Depends on the version of Outlook. Back level clients will query the E2K
server which uses DSproxy services to do the lookup for the client. Outlook
2000 and XP are given a nearby GC server to do it's own lookups.
-Original Message-
From: Gagrani, Kishore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
/2002 (98 & 2000 in CW mode only).
> -Original Message-
> From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 11:37 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: LDAP in Exchange 2000
>
> Depends on the version of Outlook. Back level c
Bankers!
The SMTP address should be unique and you may be able to code the web app to
get that information, but it's a lot of work in place of having the user do
it themselves.
-Original Message-
From: Hatley, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 11:44 AM
To: Exch
Yes, but the server installs the application so fast that I don't have time
to read it.
-Original Message-
From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 3:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Installing Exchange Admin on .net server
There's documen
Bankers!
SYSM is the only way to go.
-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 3:49 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Trying to keep Exchange (et al) in our org
OfficeVision on the mainframe!!!
-Original Message-
From
Brackets around the rcpt to:<>
-Original Message-
From: Ed Esgro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 5:05 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SMTP message
I am using Exchange Server 5.5
I am using an application that establishes an SMTP connection to my SMTP
server
Below inline.
-Original Message-
From: Lindsay Berry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 11:06 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SMTP log analysis
Okay I need an opinion on exactly what is going on in this log file. Just a
fresh opinion to see if I'm just being a
But will it warm the syrup for my waffles?
-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 8:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Messaging & collaboration (Unified Messaging)
But,but! The magazine on the plane said that the next versi
Yes, but IBM finds this compelling need to place an e on to everything for
some odd reason. I wonder how much the marketing genius got paid for coming
up with that idea.
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 1:44 AM
To: Exchange Discu
Translation for the reading impaired: leave it alone.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 11:01 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook appointments on Exchange
My rigorous Exchange maintenance involves a beer and some
Not to mention that some of the net nazi black hole lists will add your
domain because they hate HTML so much.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 10:19 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Adding some HTML to all outbo
If it is offensive and you don't want users reading the item then ExMerge
will work. From Q260037:
If the original message was forwarded with a different subject, the ExMerge
utility cannot delete the message based on the original message subject line
or MTS-ID.
If the Item Retention option is
ability to view
channel 89, that does not destroy the source. It might lead to a garbage
collection exercise that will cause a purge to occur, but deleting the views
is not deleting the data.
-Original Message-----
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002
, see if that helps.
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 21:37
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: A mistake was made...
If it is offensive and you don't want users reading the item then ExMerge
will work. From Q260037:
I
could recover from that... there's a difference :)
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 13:14
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: A mistake was made...
You can still recover from that. Get a big magnet and go to
<>
-Original Message-
From: Clark, John A (FUSA) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 1:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC 2002
It appears as though he needs a lot more than just a beer
-Original Message-
From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PR
Limit the number of connections and limit the size of the mail. Connection
reset. Bye-bye.
If you're so concerned with not "exposing" your Exchange server directly to
the internet, then place a relay server behind your firewall to accept mail
from External sources and then pass the mail to your E
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
