Exchange POP3 Message Retrieval WOES..........

Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for Exchange to go 
out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?  It will not go any lower 
than 15 minutes before Exchange will even attempt to go out and look for 
mail.  For people that live and die by e-mail everyday, you would think that 
you could set it down to every minute if we so choose.  Why limit it to only 
15 minutes.  Is there a VB script that will run that process faster or tell 
Exchange to go check for mail now versus having it wait 15 min?

BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition

Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.
-- 
Thank You,

Troy

0
Troy (46)
1/10/2006 2:13:02 AM
exchange.admin 57650 articles. 2 followers. Follow

9 Replies
330 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 19


In news:687AB2A6-5AA9-44A9-8C7B-C9444AADB182@microsoft.com,
Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for Exchange
> to go out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?  It will not
> go any lower than 15 minutes before Exchange will even attempt to go
> out and look for mail.  For people that live and die by e-mail
> everyday, you would think that you could set it down to every minute
> if we so choose.  Why limit it to only 15 minutes.  Is there a VB
> script that will run that process faster or tell Exchange to go check
> for mail now versus having it wait 15 min?
>
> BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition
>
> Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.

The POP connector isn't part of Exchange; it's part of SBS. You should post 
in microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs for help with it.

That said, the answer is no - you can't change this. If you want faster (and 
better/more reliable) mail delivery, ditch POP and host your own mail via 
SMTP.....if you have a registered domain name, you can do this even if you 
don't have a static public IP. You will want to run the "connect to the 
internet" wizard in SBS to set it up, but see 
http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html for info on how it works.

POP connectors are not recommended. 


0
lanwench (7567)
1/10/2006 4:43:16 AM
The biggest problem is that if we host the e-mail on the SBS box that is 
fine; but if the machine blue screens one day, the company will not be able 
to receive e-mail.  The only idea I have for that would be to have two MX 
records, 1 for the SBS box and the other pointing to the domain hosting 
company; what are your thoughts on that.  I was just hoping for a quick 
solution by just lowering the 15 minute delay.  I dont know why Microsoft 
decided to not allow the ability to lower that amount; it doesnt make any 
sense.

So really the only ports we need open on the border router are 110 for POP 
and 25 for the SMTP.  The other ports listed as open on the document you 
forwarded to me; I dont see any need for those ports to be open to the 
Exchange box do you?


-- 
Thank You,

Troy



"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:

> 
> 
> In news:687AB2A6-5AA9-44A9-8C7B-C9444AADB182@microsoft.com,
> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> > Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for Exchange
> > to go out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?  It will not
> > go any lower than 15 minutes before Exchange will even attempt to go
> > out and look for mail.  For people that live and die by e-mail
> > everyday, you would think that you could set it down to every minute
> > if we so choose.  Why limit it to only 15 minutes.  Is there a VB
> > script that will run that process faster or tell Exchange to go check
> > for mail now versus having it wait 15 min?
> >
> > BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition
> >
> > Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.
> 
> The POP connector isn't part of Exchange; it's part of SBS. You should post 
> in microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs for help with it.
> 
> That said, the answer is no - you can't change this. If you want faster (and 
> better/more reliable) mail delivery, ditch POP and host your own mail via 
> SMTP.....if you have a registered domain name, you can do this even if you 
> don't have a static public IP. You will want to run the "connect to the 
> internet" wizard in SBS to set it up, but see 
> http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html for info on how it works.
> 
> POP connectors are not recommended. 
> 
> 
> 
0
Troy (46)
1/10/2006 3:10:05 PM

In news:1CE7FDBB-CD72-4BCF-9A06-F54BA5A1CE2E@microsoft.com,
Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> The biggest problem is that if we host the e-mail on the SBS box that
> is fine; but if the machine blue screens one day, the company will
> not be able to receive e-mail.

Nor log in nor do much of anything else til you fix it, given that you 
likely have only one server when you're using SBS. Invest in good hardware & 
keep the server under watch daily.

> The only idea I have for that would
> be to have two MX records, 1 for the SBS box and the other pointing
> to the domain hosting company; what are your thoughts on that.

That's exactly what I'd do - and what I *do*.. mail should be queued up for 
you and automatically retry delivery every X hours for X days. If your ISP 
won't do this for you, see www.dyndns.org and check out MailHop BackupMX - 
it isn't expensive.

  I was
> just hoping for a quick solution by just lowering the 15 minute
> delay.  I dont know why Microsoft decided to not allow the ability to
> lower that amount; it doesnt make any sense.

Well, note that if you try to check any POP account while it's already 
downloading mail from your last logged in session, you might run into 
problems, for one thing. Beyond that, I can't say.

>So really the only ports we need open on the border router are 110
> for POP and 25 for the SMTP.  The other ports listed as open on the
> document you forwarded to me; I dont see any need for those ports to
> be open to the Exchange box do you?

You don't need 110 unless you're hosting POP mail for external users (I 
don't).



>
>
>>
>>
>> In news:687AB2A6-5AA9-44A9-8C7B-C9444AADB182@microsoft.com,
>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>>> Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for
>>> Exchange to go out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?
>>> It will not go any lower than 15 minutes before Exchange will even
>>> attempt to go out and look for mail.  For people that live and die
>>> by e-mail everyday, you would think that you could set it down to
>>> every minute if we so choose.  Why limit it to only 15 minutes.  Is
>>> there a VB script that will run that process faster or tell
>>> Exchange to go check for mail now versus having it wait 15 min?
>>>
>>> BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition
>>>
>>> Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.
>>
>> The POP connector isn't part of Exchange; it's part of SBS. You
>> should post in microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs for help with it.
>>
>> That said, the answer is no - you can't change this. If you want
>> faster (and better/more reliable) mail delivery, ditch POP and host
>> your own mail via SMTP.....if you have a registered domain name, you
>> can do this even if you don't have a static public IP. You will want
>> to run the "connect to the internet" wizard in SBS to set it up, but
>> see http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html for info on how
>> it works.
>>
>> POP connectors are not recommended. 


0
lanwench (7567)
1/10/2006 3:29:12 PM
We do have two users in California that pull their mail by using POP3.  I 
told them they could connect to the box via VPN then launch Outlook to 
connect to the Exchange box; they said to many steps.  The website and e-mail 
are currently hosted by a third party and of which all DNS records point to 
them.  I can log into the account, add the mx1.domain.com and mx2.domain.com; 
mx1 pointing to the Exchange server, mx2 pointing to the DNS hosting company 
for redundancy.

Then opein ports 110 and 25 forwarded to the Exchange server.  Also, the 
good thing is, they have a static IP at that office, so we are good to go 
there.  Any other thoughts or concerns that you can think of?

Thank you again for all of your insight, greatly appreciated,


-- 
Thank You,

Troy



"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:

> 
> 
> In news:1CE7FDBB-CD72-4BCF-9A06-F54BA5A1CE2E@microsoft.com,
> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> > The biggest problem is that if we host the e-mail on the SBS box that
> > is fine; but if the machine blue screens one day, the company will
> > not be able to receive e-mail.
> 
> Nor log in nor do much of anything else til you fix it, given that you 
> likely have only one server when you're using SBS. Invest in good hardware & 
> keep the server under watch daily.
> 
> > The only idea I have for that would
> > be to have two MX records, 1 for the SBS box and the other pointing
> > to the domain hosting company; what are your thoughts on that.
> 
> That's exactly what I'd do - and what I *do*.. mail should be queued up for 
> you and automatically retry delivery every X hours for X days. If your ISP 
> won't do this for you, see www.dyndns.org and check out MailHop BackupMX - 
> it isn't expensive.
> 
>   I was
> > just hoping for a quick solution by just lowering the 15 minute
> > delay.  I dont know why Microsoft decided to not allow the ability to
> > lower that amount; it doesnt make any sense.
> 
> Well, note that if you try to check any POP account while it's already 
> downloading mail from your last logged in session, you might run into 
> problems, for one thing. Beyond that, I can't say.
> 
> >So really the only ports we need open on the border router are 110
> > for POP and 25 for the SMTP.  The other ports listed as open on the
> > document you forwarded to me; I dont see any need for those ports to
> > be open to the Exchange box do you?
> 
> You don't need 110 unless you're hosting POP mail for external users (I 
> don't).
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> In news:687AB2A6-5AA9-44A9-8C7B-C9444AADB182@microsoft.com,
> >> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> >>> Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for
> >>> Exchange to go out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?
> >>> It will not go any lower than 15 minutes before Exchange will even
> >>> attempt to go out and look for mail.  For people that live and die
> >>> by e-mail everyday, you would think that you could set it down to
> >>> every minute if we so choose.  Why limit it to only 15 minutes.  Is
> >>> there a VB script that will run that process faster or tell
> >>> Exchange to go check for mail now versus having it wait 15 min?
> >>>
> >>> BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition
> >>>
> >>> Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.
> >>
> >> The POP connector isn't part of Exchange; it's part of SBS. You
> >> should post in microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs for help with it.
> >>
> >> That said, the answer is no - you can't change this. If you want
> >> faster (and better/more reliable) mail delivery, ditch POP and host
> >> your own mail via SMTP.....if you have a registered domain name, you
> >> can do this even if you don't have a static public IP. You will want
> >> to run the "connect to the internet" wizard in SBS to set it up, but
> >> see http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html for info on how
> >> it works.
> >>
> >> POP connectors are not recommended. 
> 
> 
> 
0
Troy (46)
1/10/2006 4:38:06 PM

In news:0B83C27F-A65D-4440-AA89-A98D8C93108F@microsoft.com,
Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> We do have two users in California that pull their mail by using
> POP3.  I told them they could connect to the box via VPN then launch
> Outlook to connect to the Exchange box; they said to many steps.

If they're using Windows XP (SP1 or SP2) and Outlook 2003, much better to 
have them do RPC over HTTPs & use cached mode - this would be much better 
overall anyway. No VPN required - they'd get full Outlook/Exchange 
functionality and mail would not be removed from your server.

> The
> website and e-mail are currently hosted by a third party and of which
> all DNS records point to them.

>   I can log into the account, add the
> mx1.domain.com and mx2.domain.com; mx1 pointing to the Exchange
> server, mx2 pointing to the DNS hosting company for redundancy.

If they do store & forward for your domain and automatically retry delivery 
for a few days, well and good - just make sure they aren't hanging on to the 
mail in POP mailboxes. That won't do you any good.
>
> Then opein ports 110 and 25 forwarded to the Exchange server.

110 won't be needed if you use RPC over HTTPs as suggested - just 443 for 
SSL.

>   Also,
> the good thing is, they have a static IP at that office, so we are
> good to go there.

Not relevant, really.

> Any other thoughts or concerns that you can think
> of?
>


> Thank you again for all of your insight, greatly appreciated,
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> In news:1CE7FDBB-CD72-4BCF-9A06-F54BA5A1CE2E@microsoft.com,
>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>>> The biggest problem is that if we host the e-mail on the SBS box
>>> that is fine; but if the machine blue screens one day, the company
>>> will not be able to receive e-mail.
>>
>> Nor log in nor do much of anything else til you fix it, given that
>> you likely have only one server when you're using SBS. Invest in
>> good hardware & keep the server under watch daily.
>>
>>> The only idea I have for that would
>>> be to have two MX records, 1 for the SBS box and the other pointing
>>> to the domain hosting company; what are your thoughts on that.
>>
>> That's exactly what I'd do - and what I *do*.. mail should be queued
>> up for you and automatically retry delivery every X hours for X
>> days. If your ISP won't do this for you, see www.dyndns.org and
>> check out MailHop BackupMX - it isn't expensive.
>>
>>   I was
>>> just hoping for a quick solution by just lowering the 15 minute
>>> delay.  I dont know why Microsoft decided to not allow the ability
>>> to lower that amount; it doesnt make any sense.
>>
>> Well, note that if you try to check any POP account while it's
>> already downloading mail from your last logged in session, you might
>> run into problems, for one thing. Beyond that, I can't say.
>>
>>> So really the only ports we need open on the border router are 110
>>> for POP and 25 for the SMTP.  The other ports listed as open on the
>>> document you forwarded to me; I dont see any need for those ports to
>>> be open to the Exchange box do you?
>>
>> You don't need 110 unless you're hosting POP mail for external users
>> (I don't).
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In news:687AB2A6-5AA9-44A9-8C7B-C9444AADB182@microsoft.com,
>>>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>>>>> Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for
>>>>> Exchange to go out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?
>>>>> It will not go any lower than 15 minutes before Exchange will even
>>>>> attempt to go out and look for mail.  For people that live and die
>>>>> by e-mail everyday, you would think that you could set it down to
>>>>> every minute if we so choose.  Why limit it to only 15 minutes.
>>>>> Is there a VB script that will run that process faster or tell
>>>>> Exchange to go check for mail now versus having it wait 15 min?
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition
>>>>>
>>>>> Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.
>>>>
>>>> The POP connector isn't part of Exchange; it's part of SBS. You
>>>> should post in microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs for help with
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> That said, the answer is no - you can't change this. If you want
>>>> faster (and better/more reliable) mail delivery, ditch POP and host
>>>> your own mail via SMTP.....if you have a registered domain name,
>>>> you can do this even if you don't have a static public IP. You
>>>> will want to run the "connect to the internet" wizard in SBS to
>>>> set it up, but see http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html
>>>> for info on how it works.
>>>>
>>>> POP connectors are not recommended. 


0
lanwench (7567)
1/10/2006 4:52:27 PM
What is required for the setup of RPC over HTTP on SBS 2003; and yes all 
clients are using XP SP2 with Outlook 2003.  I had always thought you needed 
a front end server to pass the RPC info back to the SBS box?  
-- 
Thank You,

Troy



"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:

> 
> 
> In news:0B83C27F-A65D-4440-AA89-A98D8C93108F@microsoft.com,
> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> > We do have two users in California that pull their mail by using
> > POP3.  I told them they could connect to the box via VPN then launch
> > Outlook to connect to the Exchange box; they said to many steps.
> 
> If they're using Windows XP (SP1 or SP2) and Outlook 2003, much better to 
> have them do RPC over HTTPs & use cached mode - this would be much better 
> overall anyway. No VPN required - they'd get full Outlook/Exchange 
> functionality and mail would not be removed from your server.
> 
> > The
> > website and e-mail are currently hosted by a third party and of which
> > all DNS records point to them.
> 
> >   I can log into the account, add the
> > mx1.domain.com and mx2.domain.com; mx1 pointing to the Exchange
> > server, mx2 pointing to the DNS hosting company for redundancy.
> 
> If they do store & forward for your domain and automatically retry delivery 
> for a few days, well and good - just make sure they aren't hanging on to the 
> mail in POP mailboxes. That won't do you any good.
> >
> > Then opein ports 110 and 25 forwarded to the Exchange server.
> 
> 110 won't be needed if you use RPC over HTTPs as suggested - just 443 for 
> SSL.
> 
> >   Also,
> > the good thing is, they have a static IP at that office, so we are
> > good to go there.
> 
> Not relevant, really.
> 
> > Any other thoughts or concerns that you can think
> > of?
> >
> 
> 
> > Thank you again for all of your insight, greatly appreciated,
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> In news:1CE7FDBB-CD72-4BCF-9A06-F54BA5A1CE2E@microsoft.com,
> >> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> >>> The biggest problem is that if we host the e-mail on the SBS box
> >>> that is fine; but if the machine blue screens one day, the company
> >>> will not be able to receive e-mail.
> >>
> >> Nor log in nor do much of anything else til you fix it, given that
> >> you likely have only one server when you're using SBS. Invest in
> >> good hardware & keep the server under watch daily.
> >>
> >>> The only idea I have for that would
> >>> be to have two MX records, 1 for the SBS box and the other pointing
> >>> to the domain hosting company; what are your thoughts on that.
> >>
> >> That's exactly what I'd do - and what I *do*.. mail should be queued
> >> up for you and automatically retry delivery every X hours for X
> >> days. If your ISP won't do this for you, see www.dyndns.org and
> >> check out MailHop BackupMX - it isn't expensive.
> >>
> >>   I was
> >>> just hoping for a quick solution by just lowering the 15 minute
> >>> delay.  I dont know why Microsoft decided to not allow the ability
> >>> to lower that amount; it doesnt make any sense.
> >>
> >> Well, note that if you try to check any POP account while it's
> >> already downloading mail from your last logged in session, you might
> >> run into problems, for one thing. Beyond that, I can't say.
> >>
> >>> So really the only ports we need open on the border router are 110
> >>> for POP and 25 for the SMTP.  The other ports listed as open on the
> >>> document you forwarded to me; I dont see any need for those ports to
> >>> be open to the Exchange box do you?
> >>
> >> You don't need 110 unless you're hosting POP mail for external users
> >> (I don't).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> In news:687AB2A6-5AA9-44A9-8C7B-C9444AADB182@microsoft.com,
> >>>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> >>>>> Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for
> >>>>> Exchange to go out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?
> >>>>> It will not go any lower than 15 minutes before Exchange will even
> >>>>> attempt to go out and look for mail.  For people that live and die
> >>>>> by e-mail everyday, you would think that you could set it down to
> >>>>> every minute if we so choose.  Why limit it to only 15 minutes.
> >>>>> Is there a VB script that will run that process faster or tell
> >>>>> Exchange to go check for mail now versus having it wait 15 min?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.
> >>>>
> >>>> The POP connector isn't part of Exchange; it's part of SBS. You
> >>>> should post in microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs for help with
> >>>> it.
> >>>>
> >>>> That said, the answer is no - you can't change this. If you want
> >>>> faster (and better/more reliable) mail delivery, ditch POP and host
> >>>> your own mail via SMTP.....if you have a registered domain name,
> >>>> you can do this even if you don't have a static public IP. You
> >>>> will want to run the "connect to the internet" wizard in SBS to
> >>>> set it up, but see http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html
> >>>> for info on how it works.
> >>>>
> >>>> POP connectors are not recommended. 
> 
> 
> 
0
Troy (46)
1/10/2006 6:00:02 PM

In news:91C432FD-E748-4EE9-BF3F-4BA3F4B75540@microsoft.com,
Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> What is required for the setup of RPC over HTTP on SBS 2003; and yes
> all clients are using XP SP2 with Outlook 2003.  I had always thought
> you needed a front end server to pass the RPC info back to the SBS
> box?

Nope - SBS does some fancy stuff (although you can also make it work w/o a 
FE/BE config outside of SBS too).

You will want to post SBS-related questions in 
microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs as SBS does things its own way - but 
short answer, run the CEICW to make sure Outlook over the Internet is 
enabled & you have an SSL certificate (create one, if you don't). Then you 
can look at http://myserver/remote and look at the "how to connect 
Outlook...." thing for more help.
>
>>
>>
>> In news:0B83C27F-A65D-4440-AA89-A98D8C93108F@microsoft.com,
>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>>> We do have two users in California that pull their mail by using
>>> POP3.  I told them they could connect to the box via VPN then launch
>>> Outlook to connect to the Exchange box; they said to many steps.
>>
>> If they're using Windows XP (SP1 or SP2) and Outlook 2003, much
>> better to have them do RPC over HTTPs & use cached mode - this would
>> be much better overall anyway. No VPN required - they'd get full
>> Outlook/Exchange functionality and mail would not be removed from
>> your server.
>>
>>> The
>>> website and e-mail are currently hosted by a third party and of
>>> which all DNS records point to them.
>>
>>>   I can log into the account, add the
>>> mx1.domain.com and mx2.domain.com; mx1 pointing to the Exchange
>>> server, mx2 pointing to the DNS hosting company for redundancy.
>>
>> If they do store & forward for your domain and automatically retry
>> delivery for a few days, well and good - just make sure they aren't
>> hanging on to the mail in POP mailboxes. That won't do you any good.
>>>
>>> Then opein ports 110 and 25 forwarded to the Exchange server.
>>
>> 110 won't be needed if you use RPC over HTTPs as suggested - just
>> 443 for SSL.
>>
>>>   Also,
>>> the good thing is, they have a static IP at that office, so we are
>>> good to go there.
>>
>> Not relevant, really.
>>
>>> Any other thoughts or concerns that you can think
>>> of?
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Thank you again for all of your insight, greatly appreciated,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In news:1CE7FDBB-CD72-4BCF-9A06-F54BA5A1CE2E@microsoft.com,
>>>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>>>>> The biggest problem is that if we host the e-mail on the SBS box
>>>>> that is fine; but if the machine blue screens one day, the company
>>>>> will not be able to receive e-mail.
>>>>
>>>> Nor log in nor do much of anything else til you fix it, given that
>>>> you likely have only one server when you're using SBS. Invest in
>>>> good hardware & keep the server under watch daily.
>>>>
>>>>> The only idea I have for that would
>>>>> be to have two MX records, 1 for the SBS box and the other
>>>>> pointing to the domain hosting company; what are your thoughts on
>>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> That's exactly what I'd do - and what I *do*.. mail should be
>>>> queued up for you and automatically retry delivery every X hours
>>>> for X days. If your ISP won't do this for you, see www.dyndns.org
>>>> and check out MailHop BackupMX - it isn't expensive.
>>>>
>>>>   I was
>>>>> just hoping for a quick solution by just lowering the 15 minute
>>>>> delay.  I dont know why Microsoft decided to not allow the ability
>>>>> to lower that amount; it doesnt make any sense.
>>>>
>>>> Well, note that if you try to check any POP account while it's
>>>> already downloading mail from your last logged in session, you
>>>> might run into problems, for one thing. Beyond that, I can't say.
>>>>
>>>>> So really the only ports we need open on the border router are 110
>>>>> for POP and 25 for the SMTP.  The other ports listed as open on
>>>>> the document you forwarded to me; I dont see any need for those
>>>>> ports to be open to the Exchange box do you?
>>>>
>>>> You don't need 110 unless you're hosting POP mail for external
>>>> users (I don't).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In news:687AB2A6-5AA9-44A9-8C7B-C9444AADB182@microsoft.com,
>>>>>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>>>>>>> Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for
>>>>>>> Exchange to go out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?
>>>>>>> It will not go any lower than 15 minutes before Exchange will
>>>>>>> even attempt to go out and look for mail.  For people that live
>>>>>>> and die by e-mail everyday, you would think that you could set
>>>>>>> it down to every minute if we so choose.  Why limit it to only
>>>>>>> 15 minutes. Is there a VB script that will run that process
>>>>>>> faster or tell Exchange to go check for mail now versus having
>>>>>>> it wait 15 min?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The POP connector isn't part of Exchange; it's part of SBS. You
>>>>>> should post in microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs for help with
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That said, the answer is no - you can't change this. If you want
>>>>>> faster (and better/more reliable) mail delivery, ditch POP and
>>>>>> host your own mail via SMTP.....if you have a registered domain
>>>>>> name, you can do this even if you don't have a static public IP.
>>>>>> You will want to run the "connect to the internet" wizard in SBS
>>>>>> to set it up, but see
>>>>>> http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html for info on how
>>>>>> it works.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> POP connectors are not recommended. 


0
lanwench (7567)
1/10/2006 8:57:31 PM
Thank you so much; I will give those a shot.


-- 
Thank You,

Troy



"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:

> 
> 
> In news:91C432FD-E748-4EE9-BF3F-4BA3F4B75540@microsoft.com,
> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> > What is required for the setup of RPC over HTTP on SBS 2003; and yes
> > all clients are using XP SP2 with Outlook 2003.  I had always thought
> > you needed a front end server to pass the RPC info back to the SBS
> > box?
> 
> Nope - SBS does some fancy stuff (although you can also make it work w/o a 
> FE/BE config outside of SBS too).
> 
> You will want to post SBS-related questions in 
> microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs as SBS does things its own way - but 
> short answer, run the CEICW to make sure Outlook over the Internet is 
> enabled & you have an SSL certificate (create one, if you don't). Then you 
> can look at http://myserver/remote and look at the "how to connect 
> Outlook...." thing for more help.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> In news:0B83C27F-A65D-4440-AA89-A98D8C93108F@microsoft.com,
> >> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> >>> We do have two users in California that pull their mail by using
> >>> POP3.  I told them they could connect to the box via VPN then launch
> >>> Outlook to connect to the Exchange box; they said to many steps.
> >>
> >> If they're using Windows XP (SP1 or SP2) and Outlook 2003, much
> >> better to have them do RPC over HTTPs & use cached mode - this would
> >> be much better overall anyway. No VPN required - they'd get full
> >> Outlook/Exchange functionality and mail would not be removed from
> >> your server.
> >>
> >>> The
> >>> website and e-mail are currently hosted by a third party and of
> >>> which all DNS records point to them.
> >>
> >>>   I can log into the account, add the
> >>> mx1.domain.com and mx2.domain.com; mx1 pointing to the Exchange
> >>> server, mx2 pointing to the DNS hosting company for redundancy.
> >>
> >> If they do store & forward for your domain and automatically retry
> >> delivery for a few days, well and good - just make sure they aren't
> >> hanging on to the mail in POP mailboxes. That won't do you any good.
> >>>
> >>> Then opein ports 110 and 25 forwarded to the Exchange server.
> >>
> >> 110 won't be needed if you use RPC over HTTPs as suggested - just
> >> 443 for SSL.
> >>
> >>>   Also,
> >>> the good thing is, they have a static IP at that office, so we are
> >>> good to go there.
> >>
> >> Not relevant, really.
> >>
> >>> Any other thoughts or concerns that you can think
> >>> of?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Thank you again for all of your insight, greatly appreciated,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> In news:1CE7FDBB-CD72-4BCF-9A06-F54BA5A1CE2E@microsoft.com,
> >>>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> >>>>> The biggest problem is that if we host the e-mail on the SBS box
> >>>>> that is fine; but if the machine blue screens one day, the company
> >>>>> will not be able to receive e-mail.
> >>>>
> >>>> Nor log in nor do much of anything else til you fix it, given that
> >>>> you likely have only one server when you're using SBS. Invest in
> >>>> good hardware & keep the server under watch daily.
> >>>>
> >>>>> The only idea I have for that would
> >>>>> be to have two MX records, 1 for the SBS box and the other
> >>>>> pointing to the domain hosting company; what are your thoughts on
> >>>>> that.
> >>>>
> >>>> That's exactly what I'd do - and what I *do*.. mail should be
> >>>> queued up for you and automatically retry delivery every X hours
> >>>> for X days. If your ISP won't do this for you, see www.dyndns.org
> >>>> and check out MailHop BackupMX - it isn't expensive.
> >>>>
> >>>>   I was
> >>>>> just hoping for a quick solution by just lowering the 15 minute
> >>>>> delay.  I dont know why Microsoft decided to not allow the ability
> >>>>> to lower that amount; it doesnt make any sense.
> >>>>
> >>>> Well, note that if you try to check any POP account while it's
> >>>> already downloading mail from your last logged in session, you
> >>>> might run into problems, for one thing. Beyond that, I can't say.
> >>>>
> >>>>> So really the only ports we need open on the border router are 110
> >>>>> for POP and 25 for the SMTP.  The other ports listed as open on
> >>>>> the document you forwarded to me; I dont see any need for those
> >>>>> ports to be open to the Exchange box do you?
> >>>>
> >>>> You don't need 110 unless you're hosting POP mail for external
> >>>> users (I don't).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In news:687AB2A6-5AA9-44A9-8C7B-C9444AADB182@microsoft.com,
> >>>>>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
> >>>>>>> Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for
> >>>>>>> Exchange to go out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?
> >>>>>>> It will not go any lower than 15 minutes before Exchange will
> >>>>>>> even attempt to go out and look for mail.  For people that live
> >>>>>>> and die by e-mail everyday, you would think that you could set
> >>>>>>> it down to every minute if we so choose.  Why limit it to only
> >>>>>>> 15 minutes. Is there a VB script that will run that process
> >>>>>>> faster or tell Exchange to go check for mail now versus having
> >>>>>>> it wait 15 min?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The POP connector isn't part of Exchange; it's part of SBS. You
> >>>>>> should post in microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs for help with
> >>>>>> it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That said, the answer is no - you can't change this. If you want
> >>>>>> faster (and better/more reliable) mail delivery, ditch POP and
> >>>>>> host your own mail via SMTP.....if you have a registered domain
> >>>>>> name, you can do this even if you don't have a static public IP.
> >>>>>> You will want to run the "connect to the internet" wizard in SBS
> >>>>>> to set it up, but see
> >>>>>> http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html for info on how
> >>>>>> it works.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> POP connectors are not recommended. 
> 
> 
> 
0
Troy (46)
1/11/2006 3:48:02 AM
"Troy" <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:DC0EEF00-8DE7-41C3-A4A2-1B32B1AB7DCE@microsoft.com...
> Thank you so much; I will give those a shot.

Good luck.

>
>
> -- 
> Thank You,
>
> Troy
>
>
>
> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> In news:91C432FD-E748-4EE9-BF3F-4BA3F4B75540@microsoft.com,
>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>> > What is required for the setup of RPC over HTTP on SBS 2003; and yes
>> > all clients are using XP SP2 with Outlook 2003.  I had always thought
>> > you needed a front end server to pass the RPC info back to the SBS
>> > box?
>>
>> Nope - SBS does some fancy stuff (although you can also make it work w/o 
>> a
>> FE/BE config outside of SBS too).
>>
>> You will want to post SBS-related questions in
>> microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs as SBS does things its own way - but
>> short answer, run the CEICW to make sure Outlook over the Internet is
>> enabled & you have an SSL certificate (create one, if you don't). Then 
>> you
>> can look at http://myserver/remote and look at the "how to connect
>> Outlook...." thing for more help.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> In news:0B83C27F-A65D-4440-AA89-A98D8C93108F@microsoft.com,
>> >> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>> >>> We do have two users in California that pull their mail by using
>> >>> POP3.  I told them they could connect to the box via VPN then launch
>> >>> Outlook to connect to the Exchange box; they said to many steps.
>> >>
>> >> If they're using Windows XP (SP1 or SP2) and Outlook 2003, much
>> >> better to have them do RPC over HTTPs & use cached mode - this would
>> >> be much better overall anyway. No VPN required - they'd get full
>> >> Outlook/Exchange functionality and mail would not be removed from
>> >> your server.
>> >>
>> >>> The
>> >>> website and e-mail are currently hosted by a third party and of
>> >>> which all DNS records point to them.
>> >>
>> >>>   I can log into the account, add the
>> >>> mx1.domain.com and mx2.domain.com; mx1 pointing to the Exchange
>> >>> server, mx2 pointing to the DNS hosting company for redundancy.
>> >>
>> >> If they do store & forward for your domain and automatically retry
>> >> delivery for a few days, well and good - just make sure they aren't
>> >> hanging on to the mail in POP mailboxes. That won't do you any good.
>> >>>
>> >>> Then opein ports 110 and 25 forwarded to the Exchange server.
>> >>
>> >> 110 won't be needed if you use RPC over HTTPs as suggested - just
>> >> 443 for SSL.
>> >>
>> >>>   Also,
>> >>> the good thing is, they have a static IP at that office, so we are
>> >>> good to go there.
>> >>
>> >> Not relevant, really.
>> >>
>> >>> Any other thoughts or concerns that you can think
>> >>> of?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> Thank you again for all of your insight, greatly appreciated,
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In news:1CE7FDBB-CD72-4BCF-9A06-F54BA5A1CE2E@microsoft.com,
>> >>>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>> >>>>> The biggest problem is that if we host the e-mail on the SBS box
>> >>>>> that is fine; but if the machine blue screens one day, the company
>> >>>>> will not be able to receive e-mail.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Nor log in nor do much of anything else til you fix it, given that
>> >>>> you likely have only one server when you're using SBS. Invest in
>> >>>> good hardware & keep the server under watch daily.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> The only idea I have for that would
>> >>>>> be to have two MX records, 1 for the SBS box and the other
>> >>>>> pointing to the domain hosting company; what are your thoughts on
>> >>>>> that.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> That's exactly what I'd do - and what I *do*.. mail should be
>> >>>> queued up for you and automatically retry delivery every X hours
>> >>>> for X days. If your ISP won't do this for you, see www.dyndns.org
>> >>>> and check out MailHop BackupMX - it isn't expensive.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>   I was
>> >>>>> just hoping for a quick solution by just lowering the 15 minute
>> >>>>> delay.  I dont know why Microsoft decided to not allow the ability
>> >>>>> to lower that amount; it doesnt make any sense.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Well, note that if you try to check any POP account while it's
>> >>>> already downloading mail from your last logged in session, you
>> >>>> might run into problems, for one thing. Beyond that, I can't say.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> So really the only ports we need open on the border router are 110
>> >>>>> for POP and 25 for the SMTP.  The other ports listed as open on
>> >>>>> the document you forwarded to me; I dont see any need for those
>> >>>>> ports to be open to the Exchange box do you?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> You don't need 110 unless you're hosting POP mail for external
>> >>>> users (I don't).
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> In news:687AB2A6-5AA9-44A9-8C7B-C9444AADB182@microsoft.com,
>> >>>>>> Troy <Troy@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:
>> >>>>>>> Is there any possible way to decrease the amount of time for
>> >>>>>>> Exchange to go out and check a mail server in the POP3 settings?
>> >>>>>>> It will not go any lower than 15 minutes before Exchange will
>> >>>>>>> even attempt to go out and look for mail.  For people that live
>> >>>>>>> and die by e-mail everyday, you would think that you could set
>> >>>>>>> it down to every minute if we so choose.  Why limit it to only
>> >>>>>>> 15 minutes. Is there a VB script that will run that process
>> >>>>>>> faster or tell Exchange to go check for mail now versus having
>> >>>>>>> it wait 15 min?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> BTW, this is with SBS 2003 Standard Edition
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Please help, this is a major issue with us right now.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The POP connector isn't part of Exchange; it's part of SBS. You
>> >>>>>> should post in microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs for help with
>> >>>>>> it.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> That said, the answer is no - you can't change this. If you want
>> >>>>>> faster (and better/more reliable) mail delivery, ditch POP and
>> >>>>>> host your own mail via SMTP.....if you have a registered domain
>> >>>>>> name, you can do this even if you don't have a static public IP.
>> >>>>>> You will want to run the "connect to the internet" wizard in SBS
>> >>>>>> to set it up, but see
>> >>>>>> http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html for info on how
>> >>>>>> it works.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> POP connectors are not recommended.
>>
>>
>> 


0
lanwench (7567)
1/11/2006 4:24:01 AM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Port 25 telnet on Exchange 2K3 servers
Hi, Installed 3 new Exchange 2K3 SP2 for a client the other day, but unable to telnet to port 25, even on the servers them selves... the servers are 2 Enterprise & 1 standard 2K3 SP2, they also have Mcafee Antivirus ( file level with Exchange folder exclusion ) and Mcafee GroupShield on them... Curiously all email functions are ok, able to send and receive internally and to Internet, just not able to telnet to port 25 on any servers... If I add another port to the SMTP VS, then able to telnet that port, but not 25, so I think one of the Anti-virus programs is stopping port 25... ...

Exchange 2003 SP2 Q
Dear all, I have a few fundamental questions. 1) Can Antivirus software for Exchange Server that uses AVAPI Version 2 corrupt the store database? 2) Is it possible for MAPI client like outlook 2002 and 2003 corrupt the store database? 3) Can third party backup software corrupt the store during backup? Thanks. Regards, Kueh. 1. I've never seen this happen, though I wouldn't say it is impossible. 2. Same as 1. 3. I've never seen the backup software itself corrupt a mailbox store. Usually, backup software is one of the mechanisms to let you know that there is corruption...

Exchange e-mail address attributes?
Hi! :-) I'm writing a script to find all a users e-mail addresses (to get rid of old sub domains) but I'm not sure I'm looking in all the available attributes... A list of these would be perfect! I'm also interested in updated lists of ad and exchange attributes. I've got some xls files but they're old and only have text descriptions of very few of the attributes. Thanks a million!!! :-) /Sofia The main mail attributes for exchange are mail targetaddress proxyaddresses If you don't actually need a script, but just need a list of smtp addresses try this ...

Store.exe crashing on 2 Exchange 2003 servers
We have 2 Exchange 2003 SP1 servers (Win 2K SP4) which have developed a problem with the store crashing every half hour or so. System event log: The Microsoft Exchange Information Store service terminated unexpectedly. It has done this 2 time(s). The following corrective action will be taken in 0 milliseconds: No action. Application event log Faulting application store.exe, version 6.5.7226.3, stamp 407db771, faulting module storevs2.dll, version 7.1.367.0, stamp 40746ce5, debug? 0, fault address 0x00002238. I think it is interesting that both servers are crashing, but not at exact...

Exchange (unofficial) service pack 5
During 2003 in an effort to correct an Information Store Hung Thread, while stopping the service, in Exchange Server 5.5, I was provided, by Microsoft, a partially developed Exchange SP5. As I indicated the official Exchange SP5 was never released. I am trying to help a coworker who is restoring old data from Exchange 5.5 back-up tapes. He needs to install the appropriate Service Pack for the restore to work, and I am trying to locate the unofficial Exchange SP5 to help him. Can anyone help? Thanks in advance. <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote: >During 2003 in...

Exchange delayed delivery/NDR due to 421+Server+too+busy (greylist bug?)
Exchange 2003 SP2. I think we are seeing the exchange "greylisting" bug where emails sometimes get stuck and are not sent, nor are the users notified in a timely manner. In my case it is not greylisting but a 421+Server+too+busy error that exchange is not retrying on. Most of the time the emails to a particular client get through, it is the occasional one that does not. If I look at the message history in the message tracking cneter it shows "Message transferred to OTHER_MAILSERVER through SMTP" for the successful sends. For the failed sends it shows ""Me...

Hide "You are about to" message box
How do you bypass all of the "You are about to" messages that pop up when you run an append or delete query so it just runs without you having to hit the yes button in the message? From the Access menu Tools, Options, and select the Edit/Find tab. In the Confirm section, uncheck the warning messages you don't want to see. -- Dave Hargis, Microsoft Access MVP "Supe" wrote: > How do you bypass all of the "You are about to" messages that pop up when you > run an append or delete query so it just runs without you having to hit the > yes button i...

Exchange Server 2007 Public Folders Permission issue
We have a consultants folder with over a hundred sub folders. Is there any way to propagate the permissions down to all the sub folders? Get-PublicFolder \<Parent_Folder_Tree>\Consultants -Recurse | Add-PublicFolderClientPermission -AccessRights <see_help_for_optoins> -User <Domain\User> -- Ed Crowley MVP "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." .. "Stuart Reicher" <StuartReicher@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:DF14A00D-D9E6-486D-9237-C7ED652524F5@microsoft.com... > We have a cons...

SBS2008
Have a customer who has a telephone system that uses an IMAP connectionj to the users Inbox to pick up voicemails. Since upgrading from Exchange 2003 (SBS2003) to Exchange 2007 (SBS2008) this has stopped working. Users userrnames and passwords are still the same. I've setup Outlook to make an IMAP connection to their mailbox but this doesn't appear to work, I guess this is why their telephone can't logon either. I just get a box come up prompting for a username and password ?? Is their more to it in Exchange 2007 than just doing the regular Outlook IMAP set...

Exchange 2007 Error Updating Free/Busy Information
Here's the Message we're receiving in our event log. The Messaging environment was moved from Exchange 2000 to 2007. "Error updating public folder with free/busy information on virtual machine EXCHSVR. The error number is 0x80040115" This error looks like it started after the DST Time change. Any ideas? ...

some emails not coming through since going to exchange, no details on why
Have a user that got 2 daily emails. One from a partner of ours that was an automatic email sent, with a status of things. Has an attachment that is a .docr The other is a daily list of canadian exchange rate. No attachments. He no longer recieves these emails and ht doesn't get any emails explaining why. Any idea's? Reply Check your SMTP protocol logs - are these emails getting to your server at all? Are you receiving other emails from outside on that email address? Other addresses? -- Bharat Suneja MCSE, MCT www.zenprise.com blog: www.suneja.com/blog -----------------...

Outlook 2003 - Pop3 Mode
Outlook 2003 - Pop3 Mode - Manage Multiple Domains in single box/PST. I have moved from an Exchange Server to a standalone Outlook 2003 system. On the exchange server I was able to manage multiple domains and the emails associated with them. I would like to do the same with just the Outlook client in Pop3 mode. I have multiple domain emails forwarding to a single Pop3 mailbox as my ISP. In order to setup the correct "Reply To" field in Outlook I can set up multiple accounts to send out on (by selecting from the drop-down Accounts list). However... The problem is with asso...

Need Exchange limit help
I have a new SBS 2008 Server setup in a manufacturing environment. Two users within the company send and receive large CAD files. How do I allow this process? Right now one user is try to send a 185MB file and it is saying "the message being sent exceeds the message size established for this user." I have tried setting the limit in the console to 10GB and now I have unchecked the "enforce the mailbox quotas" box and he still can't send. If I go into the Exchange Management Console I still don't see how I can make this work. Is this something that...

POP3 Connector undisclosed recipients
Hello, I have a problem with POP3 Connector, not delivering emails to mailbox when the emails are send to undisclosed recipients on SBS2003. It downloads the email from ISP, but it does not deliver it. Any idea how to fix this? Thanks, Petr "Petr Mares" <petr_mares@tran.com> wrote: >I have a problem with POP3 Connector, not delivering emails to mailbox when >the emails are send to undisclosed recipients on SBS2003. It downloads the >email from ISP, but it does not deliver it. >Any idea how to fix this? Since the envelope addresses are no longer known, how sho...

Parent/Child window message processing
I have a problem with VC++ window message routing(not command message routing) I have a ControlBar(pParent) window and inside this window, I create a child window(pChild devied from cview). This pChild window is constrained to pParent's client rect. The problem is that all the mouse messages are sent to the parent window instead of the child window. I've traced it to AfxWndProc(), if I click on the child window, a mouse message targeting the parent window is generated(the target window handle is the parent window). Maybe this is related to windows not mfc. The child could re...

Exchange 5.5 #18
I currently have a Windows 2000 Server box that is part of it's own Domain (this box is for testing purposes) I installed Exchange 5.5, but I am currently having troubles using outlook to connect to it to test if email works properly. I have set up a user in the AD Users/Computer, and configured a mail box within Exchange 5.5, is there someting I'm missing, when I goto Outlook, and click the send/recieve button, I keep getting the logon username/password box, I enter the username and password, but no luck. I also have configured the internet mail connection to default, if I'm miss...

Looking for a company to manage a co lo'd Exchange 2003 server.
I have a client that has just deployed a Exchange 2003 system at a co lo and has quickly realized that it is more than they can handle. They have asked me to help them find a company to manage and support their email system for approx 200 users. Does anyone have any suggestions of companies that can handle this? TIA John if you google "hosted Exchange" you'll see lots of hits...probably need to look into a few to find the right fit for you, but it appears there are lots of options for this... -- Susan Conkey [MVP] "John" <nospam@hotmail.com> wr...

how to get Outlook Express to continue after failing to read a newsgroup message
I use outlook express as a newsreader. Sometimes I want to get the entire server holdings of a particular newsgroup. Trouble is, OE seems to snag when it was able to read a message header but for some reason it can't retrieve the body. It snags with Outlook Express could not download the requested message. It is likely that the message was removed or expired from the server. Subject 'Simple security??', Account: 'news.nevrona.com', Server: 'news.nevrona.com', Protocol: NNTP, Port: 119, Secure(SSL): No, Error Number: 0x800C006F and the only op...

outlook web access
Hello, Thanks in advance for your help. I am using outlook web access. When I attempt to reply to a message, the text box just has a box with a red "X" in the top left corner. The same thing happens when I open a new message. Any ideas? Amy "Amy" <Amy@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:FEA46A8B-3116-4850-BE0F-AB2B9590F20A@microsoft.com... > Thanks in advance for your help. I am using outlook web access. When I > attempt to reply to a message, the text box just has a box with a red "X" > in > the top left corner. The same t...

Exchange 200 to 2003 upgrade
We are planning an upgrade of our Exchange 2000 systems to Exchange 2003. The current Exchage 2000 systems are 2 node clusters Active/Passive and the upgrade will be done by evicting an Exchange 2000 node and then rejoining a Windows 2003/ Exchange 2003 server to the cluster with shared storage. Has anyone done this and what is their experience in regards to how long the Exchange DB upgrade may take (in general/ your experience in relation to size of DB)? Also as to what the best PerfMon counters are to watch during the upgrade process. Any and all help is appreciated Mike You might be b...

Error Messages #4
I just bought a computer that has Windows XP and I installed my Office XP programs. At least 20 to 30 times a day when I am using Outlook 2002, I get an error message that asks me to send the info to Microsoft and then I lose the e-mail address or address that I had typed in the new message I was about to send Does any one know what is happening? How about telling us what the message is that you got? Error messages are there for a reason, not just for annoyance and we arent the Amazing Kreskin. :-) First, you should read the error message and attend to that. Taen that should solve your pro...

Error message in Outlook #9
I have just got a blackberry and am trying to set up outlook to use with it. I have had my computer 5 years, but never tried to use outlook before. When I click on it, I get the following error message: "The extension configuration file c:\Program Files\microsoft office\office\addins\fldpub.ecf could not be installed. There is an error in the syntex or format of the file" This is then followed by "Unable to alter your defualt email folders. Create a new profile, make it your default by selecting it, and then clicking Always use this Profile". When I try to open th...

exchange server 2003 instalation problem(setup stop at config for registry of Miscellaneous Atom).
Hello: I've tried to install exchange server 2003 on my computer(operating system is that windows 2003 evaluation verson, installing on NTFS file system, other disks is FAT32.), but when it config for registry of Miscellaneous Atom, it stop there waiting, and do nothing again. How can I resolve this problem? The following is the log file' content for exchange server 2003 evaluation verson: ....... [02:26:28] Configuring registry entries for Services Atom [02:26:28] Entering CRegistryManager::ScProcessFile [02:26:28] ++++ Starting interpreter on file d:\exchange 2003\e3eevaeng\setup...

Exchange 2003 not sending emails
Hello, What should I do about this error: a.. Numeric Code: 5.4.6 Possible Cause: A Categorizer forward loop was detected. The targetAddress attribute is set on a mailbox-enabled user. Hosting Pack: This is a common hosting configuration problem when someone creates a contact in organizational unit (OU) 1 and then creates a user in OU 2 that has the same e-mail address by using the user provisioning tool. Troubleshooting: a.. This issue occurs when contactA has an alternate recipient that points to contactB and contactB has an alternate recipient that points back to contactA. Check the ...

New RR ISP and Business POP3 Not Working
Recently due to ISP purchase, I was switched from Comcast to Road Runner ISP. With Comcast everything was fine. Now when accessing my business email with RR I get the error: "pop3 was found but there was no response..." This is from any computer fed directly into the modem. I can take my laptop to another outside location, and it works fine. In addition, I cannot access the webmail interface from RR, though I can access any other website. I have purchased a new modem due to RR saying I had low power? New cabling, all to negative results. Has anyone had this problem? ...