| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Mark Minasi
Chief cook and bottle washer
USA
9543 Posts
Status: online |
 Posted - 09/02/2004 : 11:17:19 AM
|
Hi all --
Got my first (test) Exchange server up and running. It appears that I'm probably not an ideal candidate for Exchange, as I have a pretty small number of users and am interested more in an INTERNET mail server (most of the people that I mail are not in my "organization") than in an INTERNAL mail server. Nevertheless, I'm going to keep plugging away at it.
2003's not as bad as 4.0 (my last Exchange venture) was, but it's a trifle unclear on a few points. If anyone can just confirm "yes" or "no" on this question I'd appreciate it. Apologies for the length but I'm hoping to be of help to others.
I have several accounts that I use. Let's call them mark@xyz.com, mark@abc.com, and help@abc.com. I host the xyz.com and abc.com DNS/e-mail domains and will soon move them to Exchange and of course want people to still be able to e-mail me at those addresses. Here's the parts that I've been unclear on; I include both the parts that I've not figured out (for my benefit in the hopes that someone has an answer) and the parts that I *have* figured out (for the benefit of those trying to get Exchange 2003 to do what they want it to). Any answers to the questions or comments on my answers would be very welcome!
1) When running the Exchange 2003 Setup, I get a list of things to do, including running DCDIAG. It emits a whole series of really frightening-looking errors about how the Enterprise Domain Controllers group doesn't have the ability to have sex, or something like that. (Something about "replication.") Dare I install Exchange 2003 anyway? All of the other tests come out fine.
Answer: sure, go for it. Those errors are generated by 2003's DCDIAG, but I've got a 2000-based Active Directory. 2000's AD doesn't have the same delegated permissions as 2003's does, hence the errors, but none of it affects Exchange 2003.
2) Once past that, I set up my Exchange organization based atop my AD forest. Let's call my AD forest marksforest.com. I do not intend to host any mail servers at all for marksforest.com. Instead, I want my Exchange 2003 server to be able to both receive and send mail for those domains. To repeat, then, the forest is named marksforest.com but there should be no Internet e-mail access for that DNS/e-mail domain, but this Exchange server SHOULD send and receive e-mail for xyz.com and abc.com. There are no AD domains named xyz.com or abc.com. How do I get my server to receive and send mail on those two domains?
Answer: the book says to use the Internet Mail Wizard but it's about as useful as antiperspirant to a mummy. Instead, go to Exchange System Manager, Recipient Policies, and edit the default policy. On the "E-mail addresses (policy)" tab, click New and add a new Internet e-mail domain by typing @domainname -- for example, I added "@xyz.com" and "@abc.com." Also of course I need to add an MX record in the xyz.com and abc.com DNS zones pointing the world to my Exchange server. (Note I am simplifying things here and exposing the Ex2003 server to the Internet.)
3) So now how do I actually send and receive e-mail for my mark@xyz.com, mark@abc.com, and help@abc.com? I'll take it just one account at a time; let's start with mark@xyz.com. What do I do?
Answer: Once you've installed Exchange, it nefariously and quietly pumps up the power of Active Directory Users and Computers. Right-clicking my user account offers a new item on the context menu, "Exchange Tasks..." and will, among other things, create a new mailbox.
Note that this will drive you crazy, as this new set of abilities for ADUC will NOT appear on your other systems running ADUC. You must therefore install something -- I've not figured it out yet -- on your other systems with ADUC to be able to get to the Exchange aspects of a user's AD account.
4) Groovy. Now I'm getting my e-mail for my mark@xyz.com Internet domain received very nicely. But now people can't respond to me, or rather when they do, they get an "I'm sorry, but this mail couldn't be delivered" message from their local mail server. (Yes, I know they're called NDRs but I've never gotten used to that acronym.)
A little looking shows that while Exchange will happily accept mail for mark@xyz.com and stuff it in mark@marksforest.com's mailbox, Exchange thinks that my "primary" e-mail address is mark@marksforest.com. That gets communicated to Outlook/OWA and so whenever I send mail to someone and he or she hits "reply" then the mail goes to mark@marksforest.com, and there ain't nobody home to receive the mail. (No MX record.) I'd like Lookout/LWA to offer mark@xyz.com as the "primary" e-mail address so hitting "Reply" gets to mark@xyz.com. How do I do it?
Answer: on an "Exchange enhanced" version of ADUC, I look at the properties of my mark@marksforest.com account and see a tab labeled "E-mail addresses" which will show three SMTP addresses: mark@marksforest.com, mark@xyz.com, and mark@abc.com. (There's also an X.400 address, but I don't work for a Fortune 500 company and so can safely say that I will never need it.) The mark@marksforest.com address is in bold, as it's the primary. Click mark@xyz.com and then the "Set as primary" button, and you're done...
5) Or ARE you? After forcing replication with my other DC (belt and suspenders), I find that mark@marksforest.com has returned as my primary. After playing with everything short of ADSIEDIT to fix it, I think, "hey, maybe there's an SP for Ex2003" and of course there is. I install it and the problem goes away. In fact, inasmuch as I'm not going to be receiving any internet mail to mark@marksforest.com I delete the "SMTP:mark@marksforest.com" e-mail address.
6) Again, my goal is to have three different e-mail accounts; how do I add mark@abc.com and help@abc.com back in? I COULD add them as e-mail addresses. But if I did that, then I'd be back to the "reply" problem -- whenever someone e-mailed mark@abc.com and I replied, then the reply would have embedded in it mark@xyz.com as a reply-to address. Soon people would only be using mark@abc.com and that's not what I want. How to keep three accounts each smart enough to remember their correct reply-to addresses?
Answer: Well, friends, I just don't know. I suppose I COULD keep abc.com and xyz.com running on my separate, non-Exchange "MailEnable" server, skip having Exchange do mail for those Internet domains and create what the Help files call a "mailbox enabled" user (or something like that). But that means that now I'd have to run TWO e-mail servers. Yuck. Also, I wouldn't be able to use OWA to retrieve mail on the road, and I kinda like it, interface-wise. So it LOOKS like I've got no choice but to create three separate user accounts in Active Directory. Right? I'm guessing this is going to cost me in Exchange CALs as well, right?
7) Okay, suppose I surrender and create three accounts. Exchange is running my mail services entirely. Next problem: retrieving my mail with OWA.
Now I've got three separate user accounts. How do I retrieve them? I'm guessing that Outlook 2003 will let me create a profile that retrieves three different user accounts' e-mail... true? (I don't have it installed yet so I don't know.) And I can't see how to make OWA show me more than one user account's mail, short of opening three different IE sessions. Is there a way to make OWA show me multiple accounts?
Many thanks in advance for any thoughts or help.
|
Mark
tweetin' at mminasi |
|
|
JSCLMEDAVE
Honorable But Hopeless Addict
USA
4685 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 12:31:07 PM
|
Not sure about your scenario, except to say that I felt as if I was starting to get the hang of all of this AD/GP and Exchange, but now I feel like a dope! I need to take some classes just to be able to explain what it is that I don’t know…
This however I do know how to fix and it has been biting a lot of people so I want to put the word out.
The entire forum subject can be found at this link http://forums.msexchange.org/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=print_topic;f=18;t=000384
The Problem::
“Hi all,
I cannot send emails to yahoo.com or aol.com. Our domain has a PTR record, meaning it has a reverse DNS record for the domain. When performing nslookup, it resolves to the proper IP addy. There's only one MX record for this domain.
The system is SBS MS Exchange Svr 2003. It's behind a Pix firewall. I can send mails to other domains, just not these two.
I do not receive any NDRs messages. However, when I go to look at the queue and I cancel one my emails to yahoo, this is what I get This message was rejected due to the current administrative policy by the destination server. Please retry at a later time. If that fails, contact your system administrator.
<paradigmventure.com #4.3.2>
I check out at least 3 different sites to verify that I'm not blacklisted.
I can telnet to yahoo.com to get a response. I can also telnet to the mail server from another public source and that works as well.
Any ideas?”
hi... have you solved the problem?
I'm having a similar problem with my Exchange Server...
I cannot send email to some domains (hotmail.com, msn.com and others included) and they stay in the queue until a timeout NDR is issued. I get these error messages while they're in the queue:
- The semaphore timeout period has expired
- The connection was dropped by the remote host
- Unable to bind to the destination server in DNS
- The connection was dropped due to an SMTP protocol event sink
however, I can nslookup all the domains...
also, sometimes I get this error at system's event viewer:
Event ID: 2013
SMTP could not connect to any DNS server. Either none are configured, or all are down.
Event ID: 2012
SMTP could not connect to the DNS server '192.168.10.10'. The protocol used was 'UDP'. It may be down or inaccessible
192.168.10.10 is my DC with DNS Server
any ideas on how to solve this?”
The Solution::
“Hi Guys, I got my problem RESOLVED finally . My problem is: cannot send email to msn.com or hotmail.com. The email (which is being sent to msn.com or hotmail.com) is also stuck in the “Queues”. My problem is caused by the external DNS server, I always use an old Internet DNS server but it works fine for all the sites except connecting to Hotmail by SMTP. When I change it to a new Internet DNS server, problem resolved. Here is the location of changing the external DNS server: Open your “Exchange system manager”-> “Administrative groups”->”First Administrative group”->”Servers”-“Your Server”->”Protocols”->”SMTP”->Right Click “Default Virtual Server”->”Properties”->”Delivery”->Press ”Advanced” Button->Press “Configure” Button near the “Configure external DNS servers”-> Then remove your old DNS server and add a new one.
I think you should call your ISP and ask them for a GOOD DNS server address. Hope this information will resolve your problem as well. ”
“I finally figured out what the problem was on our server, it was so dumb I am afraid to admit it. We are running Symantec AntiVirus 9. On the AntiVirus client, we had "Enable Interenet E-mail Auto-Protect" option selected. We installed NAV after we installed Exch 2003. I don't know if this option was selected as the default when it was installed. We did not even think of looking here, we were only looking at our NAV for Exchange.
To get the "Enable Interenet E-mail Auto-Protect" option, open the Symantec client, expand Configure and click on Internet E-mail Auto-Protect. This is where it was selected. Also click on Microsoft Exchange Auto-Protect.
I have not contacted Symantec yet to find out why this prevented email to go to certain domains (I will be doing this tomorrow) but I wanted to pass along the word. Obviously this leaves me less secure for email viruses but until I figure out that mystery, I can send emails to those domains that I couldn't in the past.”
“I just found this article on Symantec's website, it talks about my problems that I was having. And clearly about half way down it talks about "Best Practices" and one of the things it says over and over is "Don't install Internet E-Mail Auto Protect" on a SMTP mail server. To
bad I didn't have this 2 weeks ago. Randy”
Document ID:2004052415562048
Last Modified:09/01/2004
Best practices for Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition 9.x Auto-Protect
on a Microsoft Exchange server
Situation:
This document provides best practice recommendations for Symantec
AntiVirus Corporate Edition Auto-Protect running on a Microsoft Exchange
server.
Solution:
There are three supported methods of installing Symantec AntiVirus 9.0
on a Microsoft Exchange server: as a stand-alone server, as a client in
a designated client group, and as an unmanaged client. Symantec
recommends the stand-alone server configuration because it has the least
potential for error.
|
Tim-
"Will the woman who left her 9 kids at Wrigley field please come and claim them? - they're beating the Cubs 5-0"
|
 |
|
|
ebrux
Moderator
USA
2076 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 1:56:11 PM
|
Hey Mark,
For the ADUC issue of not showing the new Exchange TABS: You need to install the Exchange version of the ADUC. Just stick the Exchange CD into your DC's and install the Exchange Management Tools.
This will update the ADUC. |
Eric B. Rux
Contributing Editor, Windows IT Pro
MVP - Windows Home Server
http://svconline.com/connectedhome/windowshomeserver |
|
|
|
Mark Minasi
Chief cook and bottle washer
USA
9543 Posts
Status: online |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 2:33:25 PM
|
Many thanks, Eric! Actually I knew that but it's so bloody frustrating that I can't just drop an MSI on my network and have it happen automagically. I mean, that IS why I have an AD, right?<g>
Thanks again. Did I do the rest of the things right so far? |
Mark
tweetin' at mminasi |
|
|
|
JSCLMEDAVE
Honorable But Hopeless Addict
USA
4685 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 2:47:54 PM
|
OWA should be there already, just type in \\server\exchange, which you probably know already. If you play with the SSL certificate that is also installed with Exchange you can get it to work with your network logon, but then you will have to type https://server/exchange and you will have the log on prompt. If you want to get fancy with it this will get you started http://www.winnetmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm
We are doing a redirect through our IIS server so that we don’t have to punch any more holes through the firewall to gain outside access. You can lock OWA down pretty good with the admin logon, which I like. I have blocked all attachments including JPG’s gif’s etc. I also have it set to use Plain Text only, no HTML…
|
Tim-
"Will the woman who left her 9 kids at Wrigley field please come and claim them? - they're beating the Cubs 5-0"
|
|
|
|
Mark Minasi
Chief cook and bottle washer
USA
9543 Posts
Status: online |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 3:55:42 PM
|
| Thanks, but what I wanted to know was this -- can I configure OWA to bring up THREE user/mailbox accounts at the same time? |
Mark
tweetin' at mminasi |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
69 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 4:52:06 PM
|
Sadly, from everything that I've found with Exchange ... this simply is not possible the way you want to do it. There are some third-party apps which claim to be able to do this (http://www.ivasoft.biz/choosefrom.shtml) but I can't say as I've ever tried them. The only other option would be to maybe make three mailboxes, then delegate yourself permissions to all the mailboxes so that you can "Send on behalf of...." Can't say for certain, as I've not tried this exactly.
Exchange should be able to accomplish this simple task --- but it can't. Then again, I think Exchange should be able to accomplish the simple task of blocking selected attachments (*.exe, *.pif, etc.) ... but it's never been able to do that either.
As for me, even though I design Exchange for a living - I live on MailEnable (plus FluffytheSMTPFilter) at home .....
Good luck!
-Doug
|
|
|
|
Mark Minasi
Chief cook and bottle washer
USA
9543 Posts
Status: online |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 6:01:45 PM
|
Yes, isn't that amazing, Doug?
I was stunned to learn that I can't filter at the Exchange server using the simple rules that Outlook can use! How amazing that I can't say "any message with 'Viagra' in the subject line should be deleted?" Something else.
I like MailEnable but its HTTP system is too bloody buggy. If I have 600 deleted items it takes me a pile of time to convince the stupid server that I really, really want to delete it. |
Mark
tweetin' at mminasi |
|
|
|
nickw
Administrator
Ireland
4963 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 7:20:08 PM
|
Mark, my ol' chum... if you are going the exchange route, you have to work with its limitations.... sucks, but that is the way it is.
There is currently no "decent" way to do this, but I have done one thing on one site that worked well for them. I used mail enabled public folders. Basically, I setup a public folder for each account that is "secondary", and mail to that specific address goes to that folder and can be accessed via OWA / Public folders.
However... the crunch is that whenever they send an email, it comes from the primary account. So this answers one of your issues, getting mail from a web based mail solution, but not the other, being able to send from all three accounts. This is a silly limitation of exchange.
If you are moving down this route, I suggest you give in and have one primary sending address. Use the others as recieve only. Setup rules on your mailbox to shift mail to the specific addresses to subfolders. Or flag them... whatever you want.
You will never get an ideal solution to this issue... sorry mate 
|
Nick Whittome
Minasi Forums Administrator | Microsoft Small Business Server MVP
Mark's Main Site | Forum FAQ | Forum Main RSS Feed | Active Users | My Blog| Twitter!
|
|
|
|
Lagwagon
Old Timer
Canada
534 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 7:47:23 PM
|
Hi Mark,
As Nick stated, you are stuck with your primary SMTP address as the From address in OWA. Therefore, you have the following options:
A) Create seperate mailboxes (No, you will not need more CAL's if you use Device CAL's) for each of your unique SMTP addresses. And log into OWA seperately with each account on the road. When at the office, with Outlook, you can use the From field and change it to one of your other SMTP addresses you have given your primary account permission to send as.
B) Consolodate to one SMTP address for all outbound emails.
*I know you don't want to do this, but...
C) Find someone to create an Event Sink to modify your From address to mark@abc.com, if the To: address in the original message was sent to mark@abc.com, even if your primary SMTP address was mark@xyz.com.
*This could be messy, and unreliable.
D) http://hellomate.typepad.com/exchange/2003/07/choosing_your_s.html
E) http://www.ivasoft.biz/choosefrom.shtml
F) http://www.winnetmag.com/MicrosoftExchangeOutlook/Article/ArticleID/4855/4855.html
Hope this helps!
|
|
|
|
NMDANGE
Honorable But Hopeless Addict
USA
1688 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/02/2004 : 8:30:49 PM
|
If you create 3 seperate accounts + mailboxes, you can use the Send on Behalf of delegation from your primary account to send as the other accounts. You can also set up the secondary mailboxes to forward to the primary account so you don't have to open multiple OWA sessions. At least I think that will work 
Also, open up OWA, right-click a message and there is a create rule option 
In addition, if you use Outlook in Exchange mode, creating a rule will create it on the server as long as it does not involve a local folder. I think there is a limit to how many server-side rules you can have though. You should also install SP1 and the Intelligent Message Filter. It gives the same spam filter that Outlook 2003 has to Exchange. |
Michael D'Angelo
MVP-MIIS, Pace University Accounts Administrator / DBA
(MS)NMDANGE
PhoeniX WorX Systems Administrator. If you play Total Annihilation, please join us. http://www.phoenixworx.org |
|
|
|
Curt
Moderator
USA
5634 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/03/2004 : 03:06:51 AM
|
If you could incorporate the login into the URL, I believe you could login in to three OWA sessions at the same time.
Or have three published RDP custom files with credentials saved in the code, that would open up three different profiles to a Fat Outlook client. The way we use custom ICA files to run apps accross a WAN connection in Citrix.
I got this to work a way's back.
I have never seen a way's back though.
quote:
Originally posted by MarkMinasi
Thanks, but what I wanted to know was this -- can I configure OWA to bring up THREE user/mailbox accounts at the same time?
|
Curt Spanburgh
Microsoft Certified Business Solution Specialist.
Dynamics CRM MVP
Contributing Editor, Windows IT Pro
(Romans 5:7) . . .For hardly will anyone die for a righteous [man]; indeed, for the good [man], perhaps, someone even dares to die.
|
|
|
|
Mark Minasi
Chief cook and bottle washer
USA
9543 Posts
Status: online |
Posted - 09/03/2004 : 09:22:26 AM
|
| Michael, I didn't know that. Not to be disrespectful, but are you sure? I can create a rule like "if Viagra's in the subject line, then delete it" in Outlook/OWA and that gets done AT THE SERVER? Really? That's exactly what I want. Odd that the lameass "let's get out at 4:30 every day and only finish 8 of the 14 modules in a week" instructor that I had a couple of weeks ago for my Exchange class didn't know that was possible. Thanks! |
Mark
tweetin' at mminasi |
|
|
|
Lagwagon
Old Timer
Canada
534 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/03/2004 : 09:56:40 AM
|
From Outlook help file:
"Server-based rules and client-only rules
If you have an e-mail account on a Microsoft Exchange Server, the server can apply rules to your messages even if you don't have Outlook running. These are called server-based rules. The rules must be set to be applied to messages when you receive them in the Inbox on the server, and the rules must be able to run to completion on the server. For example, a rule can't be applied on the server if the action specifies that a message be printed. If a rule can't be applied on the server, it is applied when you start Outlook.
A rule that can't be applied on the server has the words "client-only" added to the end of the rule's name. Client-only rules are applied after all other rules. If your list of rules contains rules that can be run on the server as well as those that can't, the server-based rules are applied first, followed by the client-only rules."
Hope this helps, Mark.
|
|
|
|
ptwilliams
Moderator
United Kingdom
4401 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/03/2004 : 10:42:35 AM
|
> "Odd that the lameass "let's get out at 4:30 every day and only finish 8 of the 14 modules in a week" instructor that I had a couple of weeks ago for my Exchange class didn't know that was possible."
Best start teaching it yourself Mark
That's very poor mind. I hope you demanded your money back??? |
|
|
|
Curt
Moderator
USA
5634 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/03/2004 : 11:39:23 AM
|
And they work, I have been using them for quite a while. Since Outlook 98. I just wished they worked on SPAM better.
So I have two email addresses that have mail coming to the same profile in a Fat Client Outlook and the mail is directed into different folders as per the email recipient's address. Just like that little guy in the back of the postoffice. He we all like unless he goes postal.
quote:
Originally posted by Lagwagon
From Outlook help file:
"Server-based rules and client-only rules
If you have an e-mail account on a Microsoft Exchange Server, the server can apply rules to your messages even if you don't have Outlook running. These are called server-based rules. The rules must be set to be applied to messages when you receive them in the Inbox on the server, and the rules must be able to run to completion on the server. For example, a rule can't be applied on the server if the action specifies that a message be printed. If a rule can't be applied on the server, it is applied when you start Outlook.
A rule that can't be applied on the server has the words "client-only" added to the end of the rule's name. Client-only rules are applied after all other rules. If your list of rules contains rules that can be run on the server as well as those that can't, the server-based rules are applied first, followed by the client-only rules."
Hope this helps, Mark.
|
Curt Spanburgh
Microsoft Certified Business Solution Specialist.
Dynamics CRM MVP
Contributing Editor, Windows IT Pro
(Romans 5:7) . . .For hardly will anyone die for a righteous [man]; indeed, for the good [man], perhaps, someone even dares to die.
|
|
|
|
ebrux
Moderator
USA
2076 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/03/2004 : 1:59:11 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by MarkMinasi
...Odd that the lameass "let's get out at 4:30 every day and only finish 8 of the 14 modules in a week" instructor that I had a couple of weeks ago for my Exchange class didn't know that was possible....
We've had to move out of the Spokane, WA area for our training. The instructors here just don't have the "real world" experiance that we needed. Anyone can read the book to me, but if I'm paying $2k for a class, I want a guy that's actually DONE IT.
So, we now fly over the mountains to the Seattle or Portland area. The instructor that I had for Exchange 2003 training had just spent three months at the Microsoft campus working on a white paper on upgrading 5.5 to 2003. This guy had TONS of real world experiance that wasn't in the book.
The moral of the story is this: if you want good training, find a facility that has instructors who have "done it" first.
Or, just go to Orlando in October. |
Eric B. Rux
Contributing Editor, Windows IT Pro
MVP - Windows Home Server
http://svconline.com/connectedhome/windowshomeserver |
Edited by - ebrux on 09/03/2004 2:00:05 PM |
|
|
|
Curt
Moderator
USA
5634 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/03/2004 : 2:15:01 PM
|
Most of the time I find that I need to install and mess with a product like Exchange in serveral diffenent environments and try lots of things, before I go to a class. Then, get some training and fill in the gaps.
quote:
Originally posted by ebrux
quote:
Originally posted by MarkMinasi
...Odd that the lameass "let's get out at 4:30 every day and only finish 8 of the 14 modules in a week" instructor that I had a couple of weeks ago for my Exchange class didn't know that was possible....
We've had to move out of the Spokane, WA area for our training. The instructors here just don't have the "real world" experiance that we needed. Anyone can read the book to me, but if I'm paying $2k for a class, I want a guy that's actually DONE IT.
So, we now fly over the mountains to the Seattle or Portland area. The instructor that I had for Exchange 2003 training had just spent three months at the Microsoft campus working on a white paper on upgrading 5.5 to 2003. This guy had TONS of real world experiance that wasn't in the book.
The moral of the story is this: if you want good training, find a facility that has instructors who have "done it" first.
Or, just go to Orlando in October.
|
Curt Spanburgh
Microsoft Certified Business Solution Specialist.
Dynamics CRM MVP
Contributing Editor, Windows IT Pro
(Romans 5:7) . . .For hardly will anyone die for a righteous [man]; indeed, for the good [man], perhaps, someone even dares to die.
|
|
|
|
Mark Minasi
Chief cook and bottle washer
USA
9543 Posts
Status: online |
Posted - 09/03/2004 : 4:36:38 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ptwilliams
> "Odd that the lameass "let's get out at 4:30 every day and only finish 8 of the 14 modules in a week" instructor that I had a couple of weeks ago for my Exchange class didn't know that was possible."
Best start teaching it yourself Mark
That's very poor mind. I hope you demanded your money back???
No luck. They want to send me to another of their training centers to retake it. I just don't have the time. |
Mark
tweetin' at mminasi |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
69 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/04/2004 : 7:32:18 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by MarkMinasi
Odd that the lameass "let's get out at 4:30 every day and only finish 8 of the 14 modules in a week" instructor that I had a couple of weeks ago for my Exchange class didn't know that was possible.
If I'm not mistaken, the IMF (I just can't help but hear the Mission: IMPOSSIBLE theme music in my yead when I write that!) is an add-on release for Exchange, so it's not covered in the standard 5-day 2003 class.
At least it wasn't in mine.
IMF still doesn't block attachments, though, from what I've seen. Spam is annoying, true ... but viruses make administrators spend hours cleaning networks! Give me a way to block *.EXE's without running a third party filter like Fluffy!
Good luck!
-Doug
|
Douglas Toombs
Contributing Editor
Windows IT Pro Magazine |
|
|
|
Mark Minasi
Chief cook and bottle washer
USA
9543 Posts
Status: online |
Posted - 09/06/2004 : 1:16:52 PM
|
Sorry, Doug, I missed your meaning. I did not mean to imply that I had hoped that the class covered IMF. Just that it would cover the things that it said that it would cover.
My question to the instructor had been whether or not you could create a simple rule like "if there's 'viagra' in the subject line, then the server should delete it." I figured that if Outlook could do it, then it'd be silly for Exchange not to do it. |
Mark
tweetin' at mminasi |
|
|
|
ortuno2k
Here To Stay
USA
174 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/07/2004 : 12:26:46 AM
|
Mark,
Once you setup a rule for "if there's viagra...." using outlook, the exchange server will automatically do it no matter which machine you use to log on or if you use OWA.
However; I've seen the case when sometimes OWA does not work properly with certain rules, and they only work by having Outlook open if you created them in outlook.
But for me, the majority of the rules work both on Outlook & Owa...I'm not sure if you were looking for that answer.. |
|
|
|
Mark Minasi
Chief cook and bottle washer
USA
9543 Posts
Status: online |
Posted - 09/07/2004 : 06:50:41 AM
|
Juan, my question was a more under-the-hood one: does the Exchange server actually EXECUTE the rules, or merely STORE them centrally so any copy of Outlook that I'm running receives them?
It's important because I'm often in low-bandwidth sites and I don't want to first download the hundreds of crap e-mails and then have Outlook/Outlook Express delete them locally; instead, I want the server to delete them and save me the time and bandwidth. |
Mark
tweetin' at mminasi |
|
|
|
ortuno2k
Here To Stay
USA
174 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 09/07/2004 : 08:55:52 AM
|
I think the server only stores the rules settings, and the actual outlook or owa client are the ones that execute it.
I'll give you an example: I have a rule setup so if I get any emails from GFI security alerting me that my GFI updated...and blah blah...this rule is to delete all of those items which I don't need. These emails are sent from the GFI security program itself to the administrator account, which then forwards me the emails.
If I have outlook running, the rule will execute, the items will be marked as read and moved to the deleted items folder. If I'm on OWA, the rule won't execute. The emails will stay in my inbox until I open outlook.
On the other hand, I have another rule. This one is called "netflix." Since I'm a subscriber, I get daily emails from them. I have a folder, which moves all mail I get from them to that folder. This rule will execute on both outlook & owa.
I don't think the server executes them; I think it only remembers the settings.
Anyone please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm still VERY new to exchange; about 2 months into it |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Notes/Questions on installing Exchange 2003
