One small correction, the Corp/IMO modes only existed in OL 98 and 2000,
they were dropped in OL 2002.
--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]
Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. Due to
the (insert latest virus name here) virus, all mail sent to my personal
account will be deleted without reading.
After furious head scratching, Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] asked:
| In | King Richard <
[email protected]> typed:
|| Actually, ... I think you misunderstood my question.
||
|| First, you mentioned this icky web-based interface. I'm using it
|| because the email notifications I am receiving point to it.
|
| You don't need notifications if you use a news reader - you can go in
| & view replies posted to messages very easily - there are views & all
| sorts of features.
|
|| I could
|| go to the newsgroup you suggested, but what brought me to this one
|| was important to me.
|
| This is an Outlook newsgroup, and we've moved on from discussing
| Outlook here. You did see Roady's reply to your first post, didn't
| you?
|
|| If you would like it changed, it's not something
|| I can do. You need to contact the Admin for this board and have them
|| add a switch or three, or re-aim the scripting that gets fired when a
|| post is made.
|
| I assure you that I have no influence whatsoever with whomever
| manages the Microsoft web interface to their public newsgroups!
|
|| The email notifications carry the link and that link
|| is pre-set to the type of file opened in response and the app that
|| does so. Truly, I can't change that.
|
| No, but you don't have to use it. Anyway.
|
|| Next, the client has their
|| reasons. Nothing I can do about it. It's been discussed, and down
|| the road, when the implementation can be built and tested before
|| putting into production, the change-over will be made. Until then,
|| this existing system (prior to my arriving on the scene), has to be
|| maintained so that their business continues.
|
| Understood - and it's your job as a consultant to advise them as to
| what makes the most sense, is the most efficient, most supportable,
| most viable long term. That's all you can do.
|
|| I am working on a
|| parallel domain project for them, but as part of that planning, I am
|| asking questions in disccusion areas such as this one. I prefer
|| insight prior to setting up the Exchange in SBS and putting it
|| online.
|
| OK.
|
|| Next, there are other security issues. This server is currently
|| being used as the PDC.
|
| Yes, of course - it has to be a domain controller. Note - there's no
| such thing as PDC/BDC any longer....DCs are peers, with the exception
| of some special roles held by the first DC in the organization. And
| in SBS land, that must remain your SBS server.
|
|| I am not open to exposing it to the wildlife
|| when not necessary. With the client's growth, it will eventually be
|| demoted and become the communications server, putting the Exchange to
|| better use. Right now, it adds Intranet use, and that is fine.
|| Until then, it is sheltered.
|
| You can't demote an SBS server or it will not work. Don't try it. It
| has to be a DC.
|
||
|| Next, from a few years experience with OUTLOOK through 2000, OL could
|| be installed as either/or corporate/internet connection. It never
|| did both concurrently very well. I suspect that is the case in
|| v2003, and am hoping for confirmation of that or other avenues to
|| pursue.
|
| The corporate/internet distinction hasn't existed since OL2002.
| OL2003 is even better. You can mix account types, but I don't
| recommend it....it's not efficient to download everyone's internet
| mail from their workstations. It's also not terribly secure in that
| you have no control over the mail flow and can't ensure it's scanned
| by your Exchange-aware antivirus software (a must) before it hits the
| mailboxes.
|
|| Finally, your 'espaining' is fine, but sometimes there simply are
|| things that are not overtly stated, for the obvious reasons
|| (security).
|
| Honestly, I'll bet this network probably already has more serious, and
| hidden, security problems than you'll experience by opening up TCP
| port 25 inbound to your Exchange server's LAN IP. However, if you
| don't want to expose your Exchange server directly to the internet,
| you could install a Linux box running Postfix (etc) in your DMZ, and
| have it receive your Internet mail - and then it can relay that
| securely to your Exchange server on the LAN. Most small companies
| don't bother with this, but it's quite doable.
| You can also secure OWA with SSL (in fact, I don't open it up
| otherwise).
|
|| So, I hope you understand, the issues you introduced are
|| secondary to my need. I am looking for a solution or three.
|| That said, it would be nice to have two accounts in the OL2003, one
|| aimed at the Exchange server and another towards the outside hosted
|| account, but therein, appears to be where the issue is.
|
| Not the original issue you posted about, though....that does sound
| like antivirus.
| For anything else, please post in the more relevant newsgroup I
| referred you to.
|
|| I think it's
|| an issue of prf entries, and will be checking the content in them.
|| Otherwise, it could also be the AV software, and that is being
|| investigated also. Beyond that, I'm open to suggestions, but using
|| the embedded EXCHANGE server is not in the plan at this moment.
|| Thanks,
|| KR
|
| OK - I gave it my best shot.
| No offense, but I'm curious as to what your past experience with
| AD/Exchange is and whether you've actually done full AD/Exchange
| installs before.... ?