ESM and Outlook 2003 .... Why is it a problem ?? - Microsoft Exchange |
- ESM and Outlook 2003 .... Why is it a problem ??
- 5.5 - Out of Office to the Internet
- Exchange hangs when shutting down
- STM file?
- Scripting Recipient Update Service
- Which Antispam software/tool is the best for Exchange 2003?
- Virus Taking Over E2K3 Server?
- Multiple Accounts Sending As Same Address
- Backup Problem: "'Backup is already active"
- Sending Error 5.1.1
| ESM and Outlook 2003 .... Why is it a problem ?? Posted: 08 Mar 2005 01:33 PM PST Apart from an error message with client permissions on public folders (which was fixed by http://support.microsoft.com/?id=329136) I haven't had any errors\problems with conflicts. I started reading up on the Mapi conflicts and looking at the error messages people are receiving and haven't had anything so .... Is this something they will look to fix or is everyone stuck with chancing it or having separate management machines for all staff that need the Exchange extensions in ADUC ? Cheers for your time Mark |
| 5.5 - Out of Office to the Internet Posted: 08 Mar 2005 06:19 AM PST Hi thanks for the reply.. I have tried this and it still doesn't work. I have increaed the logging on the IMC.. I don't see any errors.. Where is the Out of office to the internet setting held? is it a registry thing or is it in the priv or dir database? thanks "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote: |
| Exchange hangs when shutting down Posted: 08 Mar 2005 04:55 AM PST Thanks for the speedy reply Jorge. I have to say that Microsoft with all of their billions of dollars still amaze me on the crappyness of their software. Oh well. Thanks again. Kevin "Jorge Patricio DÃ*az Guzmán (MCP)" wrote: |
| Posted: 07 Mar 2005 06:13 PM PST Thanks for the quick reply "Steven" <net> wrote in message news:phx.gbl... |
| Scripting Recipient Update Service Posted: 07 Mar 2005 02:47 AM PST > > The problem is not duplicate addresses, but duplicate display names. I That's why I said display name, not displayName ;-). But there's a RP with the template %r .%com. There's the connection between displayName and proxyAddresses. Display names are formatted as "Firstname Lastname". That means changing the user creation script, which I don't have access to. That script was being used in one of the old environments as the main user creation process, it takes differential exports from the employee database and creates mailbox enabled users, puts them in appropriate security and distribution groups and more. There's a new version of that script that will be used in the new environment. Both versions rely on the RUS for proxyAddresses population. Thus, the script induces the creation of addresses I don't want plus addresses I *do* want, like a couple of secondary SMTP addresses and of course the X400 address. I *don't* want to throw them all away and script them by hand because of the number of different Recipient Policies. And writing a filter that leaves all wanted addresses in place is a hell of a job. That's right. If you set targetAddress, clear proxyAddresses and trigger the RUS, the address is added to proxyAddresses and the attribute is subsequently cleared, whether it is a contact, mail-enabled user or mailbox-enabled user. But what I was hoping for is that the RUS would validate the address when moving it to proxyAddresses. I just tested that, and it doesn't. Setting proxyAddresses directly gives the same result, so I'll do that instead. |
| Which Antispam software/tool is the best for Exchange 2003? Posted: 06 Mar 2005 11:51 PM PST On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 02:01:03 -0800, "Terence" <microsoft.com> wrote: Personal opinion is that the s/w is better than the h/w solution. Much cheaper if you want to change vendors. IMF will certainly help although it's 50/50 for me. Sometimes I get messages flagged "Antigen Suspect" (I use Sybari Antigen) that the IMF passed through and sometimes there are messages in the UCEARCHIVE (IMF quarantine) folder that don't have the subject prefix "Antigen Suspect" If your boss is adamant he wants rid of Mailsweeper then shove the bill for Antigen under his nose, it'll put him off his lunch but as they say, you gets what you pays for. |
| Virus Taking Over E2K3 Server? Posted: 06 Mar 2005 11:52 AM PST "Meron Lavie" <net.il> wrote: [ snip ] There are several ways. Freezing the queue is one of them. But wouldn't it be much better to have discovered why the message was not successfully sent to the recipient? All you've done is to cover over the problem. It'll come back. BTW, setting the value to 2 hours is okay, but don't leave it that way or you'll have a lot of NDR's for message delivery times expiring. The Internet isn't your LAN and servers aren't alway accessible. The 2-day period is even too short in some cases. -- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP MS Exchange FAQ at http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm |
| Multiple Accounts Sending As Same Address Posted: 04 Mar 2005 01:26 PM PST AC wrote: Yep, in Exchange prior to E2k. Why would you want to do this in the first place? You can send outbound Internet mail through Exchange and have Exchange send all of it through the relay SMTP server of your choice if you want. Yes. Calendaring is important, and there isn't anything inexpensive that will make it easy to share calendars or contacts w/o a server product - I'll hazard that Notes would now cost you more than upgrading Exchange.. I'd spend the $$$. And E2003 is SO much better anyway (as is OL2003). Was afraid you were going to say that. ;-) Note also that w/ OL2000 you can't run Internet Mail & Exchange in the same mail profile. MS doesn't support it in any v. of Outlook prior to 2002, and it invariably leads to problems galore - if you haven't found these yet, you're merely lucky. The big thing is that we have two This is easily done provided you set up permissions properly. You really need to look into upgrading what you've got to current generation stuff, or don't use it...I don't mean to sound harsh, but again, if it's important enough for your users to rely on it, it's important enough to get set up right/spend the money on. Everything you've mentioned here is quite old and unsupported - I would |
| Backup Problem: "'Backup is already active" Posted: 04 Mar 2005 03:40 AM PST Hi, Thanks for this, however this is not the cause. Even if I try to backup just the information store on its own, with nothing else selected the same error occurs. Regards, -- David Cross "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" <donotsendme.unsolicitedmail.atyahoo.com> wrote in message news:%phx.gbl... |
| Posted: 03 Mar 2005 06:27 PM PST Got answer: Need to create a new Recipient Policy which will allow the option of checking or not the check box to "This Exchange Organization is responsible for all mail delivery to this address". "samG" wrote: |
| You are subscribed to email updates from TextNData Forums - Microsoft Exchange To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
