T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
5138.1 | | SUBSYS::MULAN | | Fri Feb 14 1997 07:32 | 7 |
| Try:
http://www-ccs.wro.dec.com/NT
I just filled out the on-line forms. Good luck.
Nancy
|
5138.2 | | TROOA::BROOKS | | Fri Feb 14 1997 12:48 | 3 |
| I went thru the CCS web page and received the account with passwords
the very next day. Impressed. Just make sure your PC is set up to use
it, because exchange users will be sending you mail from the get go!
|
5138.3 | | LGP30::FLEISCHER | without vision the people perish (DTN 381-0426 ZKO1-1) | Fri Feb 14 1997 13:20 | 4 |
| Can one sign up for an exchange mail account and simply have
all mail forwarded to another address?
Bob
|
5138.4 | if you want to | RUMOR::FALEK | ex-TU58 King | Fri Feb 14 1997 13:58 | 2 |
| You can use the "inbox assistant" (under the tools menu) to set up
forwarding.
|
5138.5 | Forwarding works | FUNYET::ANDERSON | Where's the nearest White Castle? | Fri Feb 14 1997 14:11 | 13 |
| Exchange forwarding does not work like ALL-IN-1 forwarding.
With ALL-IN-1, original information like the sender is maintained, and the only
difference you see is a different network path taken. The message is not stored
on the ALL-IN-1 system.
With Exchange, mail forwarded to my OpenVMS system all has my name as the sender
and "FW" in front of the subject. The message is also stored on the Exchange
system.
Actually, the ALL-IN-1 forwarding was more like redirecting.
Paul
|
5138.6 | Be prepared | THEBAY::WIEGLEB | Voracious schools of lottery girls | Fri Feb 14 1997 19:16 | 6 |
| Warning! If you sign up for Exchange mail, plan to install it and
check it immediately. You *WILL* be receiving mail from Exchange users
from creation of your account onward. They will not know whether you
are checking it or not.
- Dave
|
5138.7 | | vaxcpu.zko.dec.com::michaud | Jeff Michaud - ObjectBroker | Fri Feb 14 1997 19:19 | 12 |
| > Can one sign up for an exchange mail account and simply have
> all mail forwarded to another address?
What you really want I believe (and what I wanted) is not an
exchange account at all, but to simply have them define an
alias for you on the systems running:
Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Connector
I never finished trying to find the maintainers of those
systems to see if the MEIMC supports the equiv of sendmail's
"aliases" file.
|
5138.8 | Setup your own Exchange Server | tunnsrv_remote.alf.dec.com::frandsen | Living and dying in 3/4 time | Fri Feb 14 1997 23:55 | 28 |
| re: .-1
I never finished trying to find the maintainers of those
systems to see if the MEIMC supports the equiv of sendmail's
"aliases" file.
Yes it will...I "hacked" this out since no-one in the ms-exchange notes
conference had an answer. See note 723 in the ms-exchange notes
conference. Note, this requires CCS to create a "custom recepient" for
you instead of an Exchange mailbox. I logged a call to CCS and these
folks told me they don't want to support this feature. I have since
installed my own Exchange server (with the proper MX records in the
higher level DNS server) to receive mail on my Exchange server
addressed to <username>@fzo.dec.com. The performance is much better
than the CCS implementation and I don't have to hassle with CCS. I
don't have access to the CCS public folders and the Global Address List
(I send mail to "firstname"."lastname"@<locationcode>.mts.dec.com). A
20K+ address list is not very usable to me, since the "flat" namespace
makes it hard to figure out which "John Smith" is the correct user you
want to send mail. Any "Public Folder" information is usually
accessible via a Web browser.
Get together with the technical folks in your location and setup your
own Exchange server. Less hassles with the centralized "glass house"
advocates.
John Frandsen
NSIS
|
5138.9 | Against policy to forward outside of Digital | ODIXIE::RREEVES | | Sat Feb 15 1997 14:31 | 4 |
| I'm suprise you got any help at all. I was caught be the Network police
and told that it is against company police to forward mail outside of
Digital. If I could I would forward it all to my favorate ISP
mail account.
|
5138.10 | | POLAR::RICHARDSON | Patented Problem Generator | Mon Feb 17 1997 10:50 | 3 |
| |against company police
Freudian slip, but a good one.
|
5138.11 | VP approval... | fzodhcp1-14.fzo.dec.com::frandsen | Living and dying in 3/4 time | Mon Feb 17 1997 21:21 | 13 |
| >I'm suprise you got any help at all. I was caught be the Network police
>and told that it is against company police to forward mail outside of
>Digital. If I could I would forward it all to my favorate ISP
>mail account.
Ray,
According to the memo I read, you can have your mail forward to an ISP, but
it would require a VP signature approval (James Mobley in our case).
John Frandsen
NSIS
|
5138.12 | | XSTACY::imladris.ilo.dec.com::grainne | | Tue Feb 18 1997 13:08 | 19 |
|
Re: forwarding of mail outside of .dec.com
>I'm suprise you got any help at all. I was caught be the
>Network police and told that it is against company police
>to forward mail outside of Digital. If I could I would
>forward it all to my favorate ISP mail account.
I didn't think .8 was talking about forwarding mail
outside of .dec.com, but rather of creating a private
Exchange server inside of .dec.com but separate from
the corporate Exchange system. Our group have had this
configuration for around the last 18 months,since
the Exchange v4.0 beta program, but have now been forced
to migrate to the corporate Exchange system.
|
5138.13 | Live on the bleeding edge... | tunnsrv_remote.alf.dec.com::frandsen | Living and dying in 3/4 time | Tue Feb 18 1997 23:21 | 16 |
| Well...since I'm .8, I was talking about setting up an Exchange
Server inside of .dec.com., but with VP approval you can have your
mts address set to forward mail outside .dec.com to an ISP account.
>the corporate Exchange system. Our group have had this
>configuration for around the last 18 months,since
>the Exchange v4.0 beta program, but have now been forced
>to migrate to the corporate Exchange system.
As I said in .8, if you can live without CCS public folders and the
20K GAL, do as I have done...setup your own Exchange server with
SMTP address of the type: [email protected] (XXX = location code)
and live "independent and free" of CCS.
John Frandsen
NSIS
|
5138.14 | I wonder if they are still looking at it | USPS::FPRUSS | Frank Pruss, 202-232-7347 | Tue Feb 18 1997 23:35 | 7 |
| At one point there was talk of joining up the tunnel program for sales
workbench having all SWB user's mail delivered to their ISP's pop
server.
This was almost a year ago and I haven't heard anything more.
FJP
|
5138.15 | | CAMPY::ADEY | Is there a 'Life for Dummies'? | Wed Feb 19 1997 09:20 | 11 |
| re: Note 5138.12 by XSTACY::imladris.ilo.dec.com::grainne
How have you been 'forced'?
To add to what John said in .13, you also don't need to use Exchange.
Netscape Mail Server 2.0 does IMAP4 very nicely, and we have a
corporate license for it (whereas Exchange Server (and NT Server) must
be purchased).
Ken....
|
5138.16 | No, NT Server shouldn't be purchased | SHRCTR::PJOHNSON | Vaya con huevos. | Wed Feb 19 1997 11:10 | 17 |
| A portion of what's at http://pcbu.ako.dec.com/
Licenses For Microsoft Operating Systems
From: Robert H. Cohen
Effective: 1 April 1996 (Q3 FY96 - end Q3 FY98)
Digital continues to make strides to improve the ability of its
employees to obtain key software packages quickly and in a cost
effective manner. We have secured greater flexibility and lower costs
for P.C. users as part of our Microsoft Select Internal-Use Agreement.
We have signed a worldwide agreement providing licenses for the
operating systems to the corporation for a single fee, currently paid
by the CIO. No-one should be purchasing Operating System licenses for
the term of this license.
|
5138.17 | | DECWET::LENOX | Do I really want to know? | Wed Feb 19 1997 11:31 | 13 |
|
Re: .16
That announcement includes NT 3.51 not NT 4.0, it would have to be amended
to include NT 4.0. It also doesn't distinguish between the workstation
license and server license. One would be remiss to assume it includes
an NT Server license when the message appears to be aimed at people who
were using windows 3.1/3.11 and want to move to windows 95 (i.e. workstation
type usage).
I heard that someone has said that NT 4.0 was going to be added to the
list, but haven't heard when that would be.
|
5138.18 | Coporate license updated for NT4.0 and Office97 | STAR::jacobi.zko.dec.com::jacobi | Paul A. Jacobi - OpenVMS Systems Group | Wed Feb 19 1997 17:57 | 7 |
|
I beleive the corporate licensing agreement has recently been updated to
include NT 4.0 and Office97.
-Paul
|
5138.19 | | DECWET::LENOX | Do I really want to know? | Wed Feb 19 1997 18:06 | 6 |
|
Do you know where to find that (non-vms answer preferable..)
Do you know if that really includes NT Server? (Seeing as
how I have an outstanding software license request for a
few of those server licenses).
|
5138.20 | I'd ask Robert Cohen | SHRCTR::PJOHNSON | Vaya con huevos. | Wed Feb 19 1997 19:37 | 0 |
5138.21 | | NCMAIL::SMITHB | | Wed Feb 19 1997 19:58 | 2 |
| Is there a special way of ordering the media so we don't pay another license
fee?
|
5138.22 | PCSoftware | 26031::ogodhcp-125-128-71.ogo.dec.com::Diaz | Octavio | Thu Feb 20 1997 11:18 | 3 |
| Check VTX PCsoftware. I understand it lists there media only.
/OLD
|
5138.23 | | PHXSS1::HEISER | Maranatha! | Thu Feb 20 1997 11:19 | 8 |
| The most recent MS agreement I saw was last month. Its bottom line was
that the Microsoft license agreement covers every installation (new and
upgrade) of Microsoft Office (Office V4.x, Office 95, Office 97) as well
as every installation (new and upgrade) of Microsoft Windows 95 and
Windows NT Workstation (V3.x and V4.x). It does not cover any version
of Microsoft Windows NT Server.
Mike
|
5138.24 | On-line kits | STAR::jacobi.zko.dec.com::jacobi | Paul A. Jacobi - OpenVMS Systems Group | Thu Feb 20 1997 13:38 | 12 |
| NT 4.0 Workstation and NT 4.0 Server differ *only* by a few registry
entries and license issues. It's not too suprising that we opted to
license only the cheeper NT 4.0 Workstation.
CSS maintains the on-line kits at the following URL. Check for a CSS
server closest to you.
http://www-ccs.wro.dec.com/nt/kits/
-Paul
|
5138.25 | sometimes it matters (workstation vs. server) :-( | DECWET::LENOX | Do I really want to know? | Thu Feb 20 1997 14:04 | 3 |
|
One must have NT Server if one is working with some
Backoffice products, so it will matter for some people.
|
5138.26 | | PADC::KOLLING | Karen | Thu Feb 20 1997 14:49 | 23 |
| I'm trying to send email to Ed Charest (that's the only way that
DIAL products can be ordered from his group, we have to send
email from our Cost Center manager's account). He believes
his address is [email protected]@internet, but that bounces with
----- Transcript of session follows -----
421 internet.pa.dec.com (smtpl)... Deferred: Not owner
554 [email protected]@internet... 550 Host unknown (Authoritative
answer from name server): Not owner
So, I tried sending to [email protected] but that gets:
The following recipient(s) could not be reached:
[email protected] on 2/20/97 14:46:14 PM
Recipient Not Found
MSEXCH:IMC:Digital:AmExch1:MROHUB1
Sending to his VMS address doesn't work, because VMS email is not
forwarded to Exchange. Anyone have a clue as to how I can address
email to him? Thanks.
|
5138.27 | | MPGS::WOOLNER | Your dinner is in the supermarket | Thu Feb 20 1997 15:00 | 3 |
| Try losing the underscore. ELF says he's at [email protected]
Leslie
|
5138.28 | | PADC::KOLLING | Karen | Thu Feb 20 1997 15:15 | 14 |
| Re: .27
(For fans of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Universe, as the hero said
from the guts of the enemy warship, "Safe? You say we're safe? This
must be some new definition of the word safe, one I have previously
not encountered...")
Common Name: EDWARD CHAREST
Search Surname: CHAREST Search Given Name: EDWARD, EDWARD E
DTN: 275-2931, 275-2931 Intrnl Mail Addr: DAS1-2/Q4 Location: DAS
Node: WMOIS Username: CHAREST_E Org Unit: NETWORKS BU
But I'll try [email protected], thanks.
|
5138.29 | Wrong ELF | DECCXL::WIBECAN | That's the way it is, in Engineering! | Thu Feb 20 1997 15:27 | 1 |
| Check http://www-elf.bb.dec.com/ , which is ELF V3.
|
5138.30 | Found the kits. Keys? | dlj.alf.dec.com::jennings | This space for rent | Thu Feb 20 1997 15:38 | 5 |
| re: .24
Well it contains a nice pointer to the kits alright, but it doesn't list the
CDROM key that's required to actually install the software. Is there another
page somewhere that gives the keys?
|
5138.31 | ELF V3 contents | THEBAY::WIEGLEB | Voracious schools of lottery girls | Thu Feb 20 1997 16:07 | 13 |
| RE: .28
ELF V3 shows the following:
Edward Charest
Given Name: Edward Initials: EEC Surname: Charest Site: DAS
DTN: 275-2931 Phones: 275-2931 Search GivenName: Edward E, Edward
Search Surname: Charest Mail Stop: DAS01-02/Q4 Country Code: US
Preferred Mailbox: InternetAddress
Internet Address: [email protected] MR Address: Edward Charest@DAS
VMS Mail Address: WMOIS::CHAREST_E
- Dave
|
5138.32 | lemme speak to the elf-in-charge | MPGS::WOOLNER | Your dinner is in the supermarket | Thu Feb 20 1997 16:32 | 5 |
| I was using WINELF, fwiw.
Why can't all these elves get their story straight? :->
Leslie
|
5138.33 | | BBPBV1::WALLACE | john wallace @ bbp. +44 860 675093 | Thu Feb 20 1997 18:06 | 2 |
| CD key? Try 123-1234567. Worked with NT WS V4 for me, I think. I do
have a legit key too but you're not having that one...
|
5138.34 | | METSYS::GOODWIN | Pete Goodwin | Fri Feb 21 1997 05:46 | 5 |
| I sent mail to the maintainer of the CCS kits page and he sent me a CD
key. He also said he was rebuilding the kits so they wouldn't need a CD
key.
Pete
|
5138.35 | | VAXCAT::LAURIE | Desktop Consultant, Project Enterprise | Fri Feb 21 1997 07:22 | 4 |
| According the the Exchange Global Address Book, it's
[email protected], so ELF is correct.
Cheers, Laurie.
|
5138.36 | Microsoft CD-key hack | STAR::jacobi.zko.dec.com::jacobi | Paul A. Jacobi - OpenVMS Systems Group | Fri Feb 21 1997 13:25 | 10 |
|
Microsoft CD-key is composed of two numbers, seperated by a dash. The
first number can be anything, the digits of the second number must add up
to seven. So, 1111-1111111 is a valid key. The key is only needed to
start the installation and for Microsoft telephone support. If you make up
a key, then just don't try to call Microsoft telephone support.
-Paul
|
5138.37 | | BHAJEE::JAERVINEN | Ora, the Old Rural Amateur | Fri Feb 21 1997 17:01 | 10 |
| re .36:
>1111-1111111 is a valid key. The key is only needed to
I think the first part is only 3 digits...
Besides, if you modify one of the .INF files, it won't ask for a key in
the first place...
|
5138.38 | 4 is also a valid number | WHYNOW::NEWMAN | Installed Base Marketing - DTN 223-5795 | Fri Feb 21 1997 17:21 | 1 |
| my Office97 CDROM came with a key with the first part being 4 digits
|
5138.39 | WHY would anyone want to sign up for this MESS? | COVERT::COVERT | John R. Covert | Sat Feb 22 1997 18:10 | 8 |
| How long is it going to take for this Exchange debacle to get straightened
out?
I just a few minutes ago received a message mailed TUESDAY MORNING!
That's over 100 hours for a message within the same building.
/john
|
5138.40 | | REDZIN::COX | | Mon Feb 24 1997 09:23 | 9 |
| Hmmmm,
The air must be cleaner, up here in MKO. This morning, I got Exchange mail
that was "Received" time-stamped at 11:33am. Since I was reading the mail at
8:15am, I thought that was impressive. Way to go, Bill. Deliver mail before
it is written. :-)
Dave
|
5138.41 | | DECCXL::WIBECAN | That's the way it is, in Engineering! | Mon Feb 24 1997 09:36 | 5 |
| >> Way to go, Bill. Deliver mail before it is written. :-)
I'll be impressed when I can receive a reply before I send the message.
Brian
|
5138.42 | | LGP30::FLEISCHER | without vision the people perish (DTN 381-0426 ZKO1-1) | Mon Feb 24 1997 09:40 | 9 |
| re Note 5138.41 by DECCXL::WIBECAN:
> >> Way to go, Bill. Deliver mail before it is written. :-)
>
> I'll be impressed when I can receive a reply before I send the message.
That surely would cut down on misunderstandings, wouldn't it?
Bob
|
5138.43 | :-) | USPS::FPRUSS | Frank Pruss, 202-232-7347 | Mon Feb 24 1997 09:58 | 1 |
| Uh, did you check the _year_ in the date sent?
|
5138.44 | | REDZIN::COX | | Mon Feb 24 1997 11:37 | 13 |
| So, being the curious fella that I am, I thougth I'd make an unscientific test.
I sent mail from Exchange account to my VMS Mail on my (slow, but reliable)
3100. The mail left Exchange at 11:20 and was received on my 3100 at 11:23; all
time stamps looked OK. I replied. The reply left my 3100 on 11:24 and beeped
my Exchange account within a few minutes. The time-stamp out of my 3100 said
it was sent at 11:24. The "Received" column in Exchange said it was received
at 4:24pm, and the message header said it was sent at 4:24 pm.
Don't know why everyone is complaining, I am sending/receiving mail in a timely
manner. :-)
Dave
|
5138.45 | _Usually_ acceptable, agreed. | USPS::FPRUSS | Frank Pruss, 202-232-7347 | Mon Feb 24 1997 11:52 | 8 |
| Yep, I usually see pretty good times between VAXmail and Exchange.
A few minutes.
I generally see about 10-20 minutes between ALL-IN-1 and Exchange.
But when things bog down...
FJP
|
5138.46 | hmmmm | ZEKE::ASCHNEIDER | Andy Schneider - DTN 381-1696 | Mon Feb 24 1997 12:46 | 14 |
| I just went up on exchange and tried sending a message from exchange
to vaxmail, and then vaxmail to exchange. The latter worked in
2 minutes, but the former never came back. The next day I tried
exchange to vaxmail and it worked in 2 minutes (thought I might
have glitched the internet address or something). So, both directions
worked - but still that first time that never came back....
.....until this weekend when the first one returned - 3 days after
the original send. Kind of curious why sometimes it works in
2 minutes, but other times it works in 3 days. Makes me wonder
how well this will work once I totally abandon vaxmail......
andy
|
5138.47 | | YIELD::HARRIS | | Mon Feb 24 1997 12:51 | 6 |
| I can send mail between Exchange and VMSmail in a second or two.
My Exchange server is located at my site (HLO) is this not true for
most people?
-Bruce
|
5138.48 | Not ready for prime time | ALFA2::ALFA2::HARRIS | | Mon Feb 24 1997 13:03 | 10 |
| I received a message on VMS yesterday (Sunday) in HLO that was sent
from an Exchange account in MRO last Thursday morning.
Another problem: How does one send an MS Word (or whatever) document
from either VMS or TeamLinks to Exchange and have it arrive in a
decipherable format? My receivers in MRO claim they can't read my Word
documents no matter how I send 'em -- VMS foreign file, TeamLinks
uuencoded, not encoded... :-(
M
|
5138.49 | from maasup::mudgett | 37303::MUDGETT | We Need Dinozord Power NOW! | Mon Feb 24 1997 13:03 | 9 |
| Greetings all,
I've tried for the second time to autoforward from the
old VAX to my exchange account. I've been reminded (for
the second time) to stop it because of all the anger from
customers who get bounced mail messages. Its hard to imagine
this is ever going to be as reliable as vaxmail.
Fred
|
5138.50 | forwarding how? | KYOSS1::FEDOR | Leo | Mon Feb 24 1997 13:56 | 4 |
| Bounced? If you use smtp% for forwarding I doubt you'll see this.
Are you using this or one of the gateways (USnRMC)?
Leo
|
5138.51 | | 37303::MUDGETT | We Need Dinozord Power NOW! | Mon Feb 24 1997 20:49 | 3 |
| smtp% is what I used along with 3 sets of quotes!
Fred
|
5138.52 | | gemevn.zko.dec.com::GLOSSOP | Only the paranoid survive | Mon Feb 24 1997 21:01 | 10 |
| > smtp% is what I used along with 3 sets of quotes!
FWIW - on one of our nodes running an old version of UCX, it appeared
that the syntax smtp%node.xxx.yyy.zzz::username worked considerably
better than the triple-quote version. (For whatever reason, the mail
to the triple quote form didn't seem to get delivered, while the other
form did.) I don't know if this was just a quirk of our system,
or coincidence of some kind, but I haven't seen problems since changing
the syntax. (FWIW - I'm not forwarding to an Exchange server, though
it is to an NT system.)
|
5138.53 | new slant at distributed computing | TROOA::MSCHNEIDER | [email protected] | Tue Feb 25 1997 01:53 | 11 |
| RE: Doesn't everyone have an Exchange server at their site?
Answer is NO. Entire Canadian geography is served by a machine out of
Kanata at the moment. So from our regional head office in Toronto we
must go across a WAN to get our mail. Imagine that .... I send an
e-mail with attachment to the guy 10 feet from me and it has to move
from Toronto to Kanata from which point he gets to pull it all back
down the thin pipe. The CCS version of distributed computing appears
to be:
Centralize all computers and distribute the people who connect to it.
|
5138.54 | A Thumb's Up for Exchange | NCMAIL::YANUSC | | Tue Feb 25 1997 08:45 | 28 |
| I am a Sales Workbench user of Exchange who recently began using it in
a bigger way. I have always been comfortable with All-in-1 mail, and
was quite leery of moving to a Microsoft-developed product. That same
trepidation can be found in some of the replies in this particular
Notes stream. Let me explain in five simple words why we need to adopt
Exchange over any of our internally developed mail products:
IT'S BETTER FOR OUR CUSTOMERS!
In sales I work back and forth with our customers on Excel
spreadsheets, Word documents, and Powerpoint presentations. Yes, you
could do some of this work with Teamlinks, but not as crisply as with
Exchange. The integration and merging of files is very smooth, and my
customers can finally read all my attachments without any difficulty.
We've been waiting for this for years, and it is finally here. Yes,
there are issues around the networks we have instituted (not Exchange's
fault - fix the networks that need fixing), and not everyone is fully
cognizant of how Exchange works yet (play with it as you would any
other s/w product, and run in parallel with your other mail systems in
the meantime. I did and can now use it fairly well, and I'm certainly
not as bright as many of the respondees on this message stream.)
I realize this is a big change for many, especially those who have been
with the company for awhile using other mail products. I'll be here 15
years in March, God willing, and I'm still learning new tricks. Give
it a shot. Good Luck.
Chuck
|
5138.55 | Leo bitten by Exchange | KYOSS1::FEDOR | Leo | Tue Feb 25 1997 10:49 | 19 |
| re: .51
3 sets of quotes? I've been using
smtp%"[email protected]", or for Exchange,
smtp%"[email protected]" without a problem, UCX 3.3 and higher
though, I believe, mostly V4.
And I'm sure you'll all be happy to know that while working
yesterday I was moved from the server Dasexc1 to Kyoexc1 at about 10A.
All documents became unreadable and inaccessible at that moment, and I
have not been able to access Exchange since then. I was not given any
notice, I was not given any information nor has it been forthcoming as
of this writing, plus this was done while I was online and active. Yes,
I do work for CCS, but this is not a prototype anymore.
Leo
|
5138.56 | Part of the design is you don't have to be local | SHRMSG::HOWARD | Ben | Tue Feb 25 1997 12:40 | 24 |
| > My Exchange server is located at my site (HLO) is this not true for
> most people?
Some sites have servers; some do not. Some groups, such as the SBU,
have their own servers, but not in the same sites. With the way people
move around, it is difficult to keep track of where people are.
Support has enough work to do to get people moved without changing
something that will continue to work. If there is a problem with the
local server, people want to be moved back to their old one, which
"worked better".
Oddly enough when you move to a different server, your address in
distribution lists may or may not continue to work, depending on
whether the servers are in the same group. So a lot of time is spent
moving people and troubleshooting the problems. When you move, your
INBOX has to be changed on all your PC's, so they like to have send
somebody to do that. So, if people are travelling, they often don't get
moved.
I would like to say this will settle down when people do, but I doubt
that people will stop moving around. I don't think the problems in
this case are more or less severe than with ALL-IN-1.
Ben
|
5138.57 | still no probs | DYPSS1::SCHAFER | Kalh�un! | Tue Feb 25 1997 12:58 | 11 |
| i've been autoforwarding ALL-IN-1 and VMSmail to Exchange for at least
2 months. have had no reports of bounces or complaints from anyone.
and as far as i know, i haven't lost any mail. i did have one "1 week
delivery", but the post time coincided witha published reconfig on the
Exchange end ("warning: CCS Outage blah blah blah" type mail a few days
in advance).
i'm beginning to think this is server-specific.
my biggest gripe about Exchange/Outlook is that it is a *pig*. takes
forever to come up and/or shutdown.
|
5138.58 | | CAMPY::ADEY | Is there a 'Life for Dummies'? | Tue Feb 25 1997 13:08 | 14 |
| re: Note 5138.56 by SHRMSG::HOWARD
> When you move, your
> INBOX has to be changed on all your PC's, so they like to have send
> somebody to do that.
Not true. There's some mechanism in Exchange Server that can
automagically tell the client what server to use. A few months ago,
CCS changed the server I was on without telling me. Everytime I would
change the server back to my old one in the Exchange Client,
reconnecting would get it set to the new server.
Ken....
|
5138.59 | | UCXAXP.UCX.LKG.DEC.COM::GRADY | Squash that bug! (tm) | Tue Feb 25 1997 13:53 | 60 |
| 11:24pm EST is 4:24pm GMT. OpenVMS doesn't do timezones without
assistance, and that's not Exchange's problem.
I've been investigating this stuff for awhile now, enough to probably
contribute a little bit here of a constructive nature that might
actually help out some.
I would suggest that unofficial and/or unscientific studies of the
matter probably won't yield reliable, repeatable, or even useful
results. Don't bother - there are too many variables involved to
figure out what went wrong when you sent one message today and it
didn't work the same way you thought it did yesterday. And *please* stop
beating up CCS - they're already struggling with a complex and
unmanageable situation, and not only do they not need the noise, it's
unjustified, presumptuous and totally uninformed. I've found nothing
of which CCS has been accused herein to be the least bit justified or
even slightly accurate. It just irritates, and it's unprofessional.
BTW, I'm not in CCS. I'm in OpenVMS Network Engineering.
A couple of constructive suggestions, though:
Run the latest version of UCX. V4.1, ECO 3 or better. Configure the
SMTP service to put headers on the top of messages - by default it puts
them on the bottom to keep them out of the way, but that gets in the
way of attachments and POP. Why is that the default? Because VMSmail
doesn't understand RFC822 headers enough to filter them out, making
it a feature to move them to the end, out of the way. Sometimes.
Use the UCX POP3 server if you need it. The older the Version of UCX
you're running, the less likely it is to work. POP3 didn't exist until
V4.1 and many problems from V4.0, V3.3 and prior releases have been
fixed in SMTP. Upgrade.
For addressing outside of the Exchange environment, stick with SMTP
(RFC822 style, you know '[email protected]' is mine, for example)
The format, transport and interface is well defined, and officially
supported by both Microsoft and Digital. It works, and when it breaks,
it'll get fixed. It'll handle MIME, at least as far as passing
attachments to other applications like PC's that can parse it. VMSmail
doesn't understand the content, but at least it will leave it alone if
you configure UCX right, per above.
Don't use the '.enet.dec.com' or the '.mts.dec.com' if you can avoid
it. I know, ELF has lots of email addresses that include one or the
other of these, but they tend to be problematic. I've seen some
hideous return addresses come out of the '.enet.dec.com' hack, and that
will probably never get fixed....
CCS is working to complete the deployment. Network Engineering is
working to make the products work together more smoothly in a technical
environment that has been a house of cards waiting to fall since long before
Exchange ever existed.
So...keep it simple (use SMTP/MIME), make sure you're using the latest
stuff (UCX V4.1), configure it right (SMTP headers on top, and POP3 for
PC clients), and don't bug the implementors - scapegoats are not
needed.
tim
|
5138.60 | Syntax? | 8112::ANDERSON | Where's the nearest White Castle? | Wed Feb 26 1997 12:22 | 5 |
| Tim,
What is the syntax to change the SMTP service to put mail headers at the top?
Paul
|
5138.61 | Exchange represents some Corporate goal | 19096::HOWARD | Whoever it takes | Wed Feb 26 1997 16:22 | 40 |
| Re: <<< Note 5138.58 by CAMPY::ADEY "Is there a 'Life for Dummies'?" >>>
> > When you move, your
> > INBOX has to be changed on all your PC's, so they like to have send
> > somebody to do that.
> Not true. There's some mechanism in Exchange Server that can
> automagically tell the client what server to use. A few months ago,
> CCS changed the server I was on without telling me. Everytime I would
> change the server back to my old one in the Exchange Client,
> reconnecting would get it set to the new server.
Your reply doesn't indicate that the mechanism worked too well, or you
wouldn't have had a reason to change it back to what you thought it
would be. Most people never look at this.
If you change your INBOX to point to the wrong server, then use the
Check Name button it will look up what server you are on. Of course, if
everyone knew how to do this, it wouldn't be necessary to send someone
to the user's desk.
Obviously, procedures vary over time and geography. Some people may
have SMS scripts to do this automatically for all I know.
On another point, Exchange at Digital is not entirely the brainchild of
CCS. MCS announced a plan over a year ago to implement Exchange
without any help from CCS. The SBU had its own plan. Those two groups
alone make up a large portion of the corporation. CCS merely won the
business of implementing it as I understand it. Other businesses have
bought into this at high levels, which is why CCS is "forcing" people
to move to Exchange.
If people think CCS is learning about Exchange by doing, they are
absolutely right. But that is not to say that the people doing most of
the work have no training or knowledge to start with. But you don't
learn the details until you do it. I used to develop and teach
ALL-IN-1 support courses, but only when I actually had to do it did I
really learn. I just had a better foundation than most people.
Ben
|
5138.62 | | COMICS::CORNEJ | What's an Architect? | Thu Feb 27 1997 08:06 | 8 |
| You think Exchange is bad!
Yesterday I received a hard copy mail in my pidgeon hole here @GMT. It
was signed and dated 20-Jan-1997 by my manager who left the company on
the 31st of January. It only had to move a few yards.
Jc
|
5138.63 | | UCXAXP.UCX.LKG.DEC.COM::GRADY | Squash that bug! (tm) | Thu Feb 27 1997 20:29 | 7 |
|
>What is the syntax to change the SMTP service to put mail headers at the top?
UCX>set config smtp/option=top
|