Pages

Search

ESM and Outlook 2003 .... Why is it a problem ?? - Microsoft Exchange

ESM and Outlook 2003 .... Why is it a problem ?? - Microsoft Exchange

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:
 

STM file?

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... 

Sending Error 5.1.1

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: