|
Swink posted:I'm adding permissions via It's "Send-As", not with a space. To verify after the fact, check "Bob"'s msExchDelegateListLink attribute.
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 16:51 |
|
|
Are Rackspace's hosted exchange upgrade migrations as transparent as they say? We're on 2007 and want to upgrade to 2013 for the lower price, free activesync, and much, much larger mailbox sizes (we're at 2GB now) Looks like the only issue we'll have is they no longer support public folders. What's up with that?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 13:13
|
|
|
Joshie posted:It's "Send-As", not with a space. To verify after the fact, check "Bob"'s msExchDelegateListLink attribute. Both send-as and "send as" will work. The msExchDelegateListLink attribute corresponds to the mailbox full access not "send as". Swink posted:I'm adding permissions via Just noticed that your powershell is giving Bob access to John's mailbox but John access to send as Bob. I'm guessing that's just a typo of the hypothetical names. Again if it's the one user it sounds like a user/client thing. I'd have them try sending as in OWA and make sure they are sending as the other user correctly. vvvv That works as well, however applying the permissions directly instead of first getting the mailbox and then applying permissions is a little less processing time. This doesn't really matter for ones and twos but if you ever need to apply batch updates for some reason you'll get better throughput by running the add permissions scripts using an identifier as opposed to piping a get-mailbox command into it. Will Styles fucked around with this message at 20:54 on May 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
We've been doing it this way for some reason. We might have extraneous syntax in there though. get-mailbox %alias% | add-mailboxpermission -accessrights fullaccess -user %username% get-mailbox %alias% | add-adpermission -extendedrights send-as -user %username%
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
Just checking back in to give my mini-review of SpamTitan's hosted spam filtering appliance: overall, pretty good. It's definitely effective, and light years ahead of what Barracuda was doing for us. The management interface isn't the worst thing I've ever used, but even after spending a decent amount of time in there the first couple weeks I found myself having to dig around to try and find things that weren't where they seemed like they should be. Most of them are initial setup items though, so it shouldn't be an ongoing hassle. Users getting a daily email of what was blocked and allowing them to release false positives is a huge plus, and has saved me a lot of time. The Outlook plugin is mostly useless. It only allows you to flag messages as spam/ham and nothing else, and pops up annoying dialog boxes after flagging and after successfully submitting, which seems excessive. Aside from the sales guy continuing to ignore me after getting a signed agreement, I'm pretty happy. I'd give it a B, mainly because it's been so hands-off. I'd switch to Mimecast if I could justify the additional cost or if the full blown package (with Archiving) made sense for us, but SpamTitan is solid for the money.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
Not knowing a whole lot about how email works, we have the current setup: - Users created through ISP's side, POP connector used to distribute email to the users from what I assume is a single catchall box (one to many). - Exchange manages everything after the mail comes in from the ISP. What I would LIKE to do is eliminate going through the ISP but I'm not sure where to start with it. Any suggestions/recommended reading?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 14:05
|
|
|
Anyone have any experience with Evault (http://www.evault.com/) <-- note, this is not Symantec's Enterprise Vault The client company we're supporting is going to replace their current Symantec NetBackup with this.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
wintermuteCF posted:Anyone have any experience with Evault (http://www.evault.com/) <-- note, this is not Symantec's Enterprise Vault Yup. We're in the middle of a good sized Evault deployment right now. What do you want to know?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Cavepimp posted:SpamTitan Just out of curiosity, what wasn't Barracuda doing that you wanted it to do? Per-user quarantine summaries are A Thing It Can Do, complete with Deliver|Whitelist|Delete|View links for each email in the quarantine.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Yup. We're in the middle of a good sized Evault deployment right now. What do you want to know? I'm an idiot, I should have actually included some questions. Is it any good? Better said, is it consistently reliable? Does it require a lot of babysitting? How complicated is automation of backups? How good is it with handling manual one-off backups? Do you have a good FAQ or something I should be checking out, or perhaps any documentation they provided you? To give you some context, my company was brought in to shepherd a large company's migration from Exchange 2003 to 2010 as well as to stabilize their Exchange environment so poo poo isn't breaking all the time. Their current backup solution may have worked before most of the people got migrated to the new stuff, but now it's just totally unreliable because they're trying to back up too much information in too short an amount of time (trying to do daily full backups on ~15TB of mail databases). This fucks us when the backup doesn't complete in a timely fashion, as without the backup clearing Exchange logs, the log store fills up and Exchange dismounts the DB. We were about to test changing their NetBackup 7.1 to incremental backups when we got word from their backups team that they're going to be changing to Evault within 30 days, but neither I nor my two colleagues have seen this system before. We're not going to be on the hook for administrating it, but we do care if it's going to be able to consistently back up every night so Exchange logs get backed up and cleared.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Good lawd. You should sell them on Office365 and then sit back and collect the commission. My initial impressions of Evault are positive. Once you set it up, it requires no babysitting really and it does seem pretty reliable so far. Setting up the backups is really straightforward. Install the agent on the machine, it registers with the console, and from there you setup your backup job. Creating a one off job shouldn't be a big deal. It's all console/GUI/browser driven depending on your setup, it's literally just click, click, next, next, job configured. The way EVault works is it does an initial full backup as a 'seed' and then from there on only does incrementals/deltas as things change. Your backup windows should shrink considerably once the initial seed is done. Depending on what appliances they bought, and how much disk space they licensed is going to affect how much data stays local. The initial seed is usually done via QSM appliances they ship out, copy the massive initial seed data to, and then get shipped back to Evault and uploaded to their systems. After that the deltas get synced to the appliance, and then to the cloud. So yeah, if it's setup properly, (I'm guessing Evault prof services are involved like our deployment) it should be a pretty nice setup. The only negatives I have about evault right now are there is no NDMP backup solution right now which really sucks for us as we use the NAS capability on our filers a bit. Most of their documentation is behind their support portal, let me see what I can dig up for you regarding Exchange.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Good lawd. You should sell them on Office365 and then sit back and collect the commission. 1. 20,000-25,000 users 2. They were going to migrate to Gmail (which we were initially going to help them with) but then they freaked out about Google's purported willingness to cooperate with governmental requests and they want to keep their stuff in-house. I doubt they'd consider Microsoft.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
eVault Admin here. We have two vaults with 30 clients backed up on the regular. Disk-based storage only. Glaring issue: Can't self-maintain worth a drat. Dedupe and expiration jobs are lower priority than backups, and it tries to dedupe/expire the entire system at once. So, when a backup hits mid-dedupe (which could take a heinously long time), it just kills the job to start the backup. This results in your SAN/NAS filling up with expired or garbage data, and you have to hunt the storage leak down and manually clean it (which is still a lower priority, so disable the backups too!) Other than that, it's OK. I like it a great deal better than Veritas, which is the only other real backup solution I've used. The SQL backup method is decent (did a bare metal restore, the only gotchas were SQL's fault, not eVault's). The Exchange backup method equally so (full MDB backups here, we use archiving to handle our per-mailbox stuff).
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Google Apps falls flat on its arse as soon as somebody has a workflow that involves a shared mailbox, or wants to deal with the inboxes of recently departed staff. I'm amazed it's still as bad at handling those scenarios as it is.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
A followup to my issues with 'Send As' permissions: My problem was that the account I was trying to send as was hidden (Hide from Exchange Address Book flag). Which apparently just doesn't work. A workaround is posted here http://exchangeserverpro.com/how-to-send-as-a-hidden-mailbox/ but i havent gotten around to trying it yet.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
Mierdaan posted:Just out of curiosity, what wasn't Barracuda doing that you wanted it to do? Per-user quarantine summaries are A Thing It Can Do, complete with Deliver|Whitelist|Delete|View links for each email in the quarantine. Their hosted/cloud service is quite different than having an actual appliance. Maybe they ended up getting that working somewhere along the way, but the actual filtering went massively downhill about a year ago and that was the main issue we needed to get away from. It was letting a lot of obvious malicious stuff through.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
Swink posted:A followup to my issues with 'Send As' permissions: My problem was that the account I was trying to send as was hidden (Hide from Exchange Address Book flag). Which apparently just doesn't work. The workaround is just going to confuse people. I just tell people that if they want to do 'send as' then it has to be in the GAL, we have enough problems with people picking autocomplete entries instead of address book ones to deal with unhiding, adding to a local contacts list and then hiding it again.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Are Rackspace's hosted exchange upgrade migrations as transparent as they say? I suspect they don't want to implement a migration patch for the public folders (Public folder implementation has changed greatly for 2013) and they can upsell another license in the form of a shared mailbox. Exchange 2013 supports public folders just fine, and will support for quite a while.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 09:02
|
|
|
incoherent posted:I suspect they don't want to implement a migration patch for the public folders (Public folder implementation has changed greatly for 2013) and they can upsell another license in the form of a shared mailbox. Their site says: quote:Public Folders http://www.rackspace.com/knowledge_center/article/upgrading-to-exchange-2013
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
Right from microsofts own Hosted/multi tenant documentation for Exchange 2013.quote:• Public Folders – If you choose to provide public folders to your tenants you should create a top level folder for each tenant, and apply the appropriate security to ensure only the members of each tenant can access it. If rackspace is basically re selling exchange online (which is different), the exchange team just provided the steps to migrate public folders. However their stance on the public folder is different than what microsoft is saying exchange 2013 can do. I still believe they have a custom deployment that would prevent public folder usage and migration. ref: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/confirmation.aspx?id=36790 ref: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/confirmation.aspx?id=39941
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
What are you using/recommending for backing up Exchange Online mailboxes? I saw one thing called CloudAlly is that good?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
NevergirlsOFFICIAL posted:backing up Exchange Online mailboxes? You're in ~~~ the cloud~~, bro. Make some PST files or something, I guess. Otherwise you don't need to worry about backups.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:You're in ~~~ the cloud~~, bro. Make some PST files or something, I guess. Otherwise you don't need to worry about backups. So is the answer you're... not backing up? I'm not really worried about MS losing multiple data centers or anything like that - but if I have a client that says "I need to be able to restore folders that my CEO accidentally deletes 6 months ago" I'd like to point them to a solution.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
NevergirlsOFFICIAL posted:So is the answer you're... not backing up? You tack the archive option onto your solution (http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/exchange/microsoft-exchange-online-archiving-archiving-email-FX103763589.aspx).
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
incoherent posted:You tack the archive option onto your solution (http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/exchange/microsoft-exchange-online-archiving-archiving-email-FX103763589.aspx). Good option I will take a look. There's also two I found on google: cloudfinder.com and cloudally.com.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
Because I am lazy and I don't really know what I am doing when it comes to exchange, I got a quote for migrating 20 mailboxes from exchange 2007 to exchange 365. The quote was 30 hours of billable time(at $125/hour)? Is that reasonable? It seems kinda high to me.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
That's really loving high. Exchange pretty much migrates itself. We charge £30/mailbox for migration and I feel that's about right for the amount of work involved.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
That's kind of high considering most of the migration is just babysitting some scripts.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Calidus posted:Because I am lazy and I don't really know what I am doing when it comes to exchange, I got a quote for migrating 20 mailboxes from exchange 2007 to exchange 365. The quote was 30 hours of billable time(at $125/hour)? Is that reasonable? It seems kinda high to me. Do you have a pre-existing relationship with the vendor? Eg do they have access to your network and a reasonable idea of the state it's in. If not, that might explain it, they will have padded the estimate in case your AD and Exchange are horribly horribly broken. It's easier to give a higher initial estimate to allow for unknowns than go back later and say "but you really have 55 mailboxes and exchange 2003, we need more money". sanchez fucked around with this message at 00:33 on May 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Anyone else run into a problem where the color codes for shared calendar items don't stick? I've never used them but I just found out that there's a department that's absolutely crazy about color coded calendar items and they aren't working right lately. I've asked my exchange administrator to make me some test accounts so I can make a bunch of calendars and share them with myself to see if I can duplicate the problem, but I'm not even sure how to start on something like this.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 01:16
|
|
|
^ this is normal. I use a program called CATMAN from codetwo.com to sync between users
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
Swink posted:^ this is normal. I use a program called CATMAN from codetwo.com to sync between users Ha, ok. That makes me feel a lot better. I was making zero progress on this today.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
Calidus posted:Because I am lazy and I don't really know what I am doing when it comes to exchange, I got a quote for migrating 20 mailboxes from exchange 2007 to exchange 365. The quote was 30 hours of billable time(at $125/hour)? Is that reasonable? It seems kinda high to me. That's not necessarily high. In fact it may be low. - is your exchange 2007 server up to date? does outlook anywhere need to be configured? - do you have public folders? - do you have poo poo that needs to integrate with the mail (ancient printers, voice mail systems) that will need to be reconfigured or will need smtp relay server staged? - are they going to decom your exchange server for you? - are they training users? - are they going to deploy a dirsync server for you? - is the exchange 2007 an sbs (lol) If you asked me for a quote and I didn't know anything other than "20 users on exchange 2007" I'd probably quote 40+ hours to be honest.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
Sounds like a lot of project risk is being budgeted for. A couple of hours for a site survey would get that risk down a lot. probably worth it, definitely worth it if they don't bill for it.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 10:53
|
|
|
NevergirlsOFFICIAL posted:That's not necessarily high. In fact it may be low. Echoing this, $125 is not high at all depending on your location and how hosed your existing setup is. If the company came in and just slammed down that number without seeing your poo poo, that might be a little high.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
NevergirlsOFFICIAL posted:That's not necessarily high. In fact it may be low. This consultant assisted with a domain control replication problem and cleaned up the AD last month but he has never touched the exchange server. -Exchange is up to date but don't pass a best practices analyzer. OWA is setup but Outlook Anywhere is not. -No public folders -No integration -Yes -No -No -No
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
Rough estimate I'd give based on that - stage dirsync server for "sso" - 4 hours assuming vm environment - purchase/set up account, verify domains - 1-3 hours - enable outlook anywhere - could be up to 4 hours depending on what needs to be done, will he need to get into firewall for access rules, testing, might need to do it off hours - set up batch and migrate - 4 hours including testing, babysitting etc - cut mx records and test - 1 hour could be more depending on who's doing your dns - post migration tasks make sure people can log in - 4 hours - decom - 4 hours Dans Macabre fucked around with this message at 15:47 on May 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
My company is finally getting around to migrating from our Exchange 2003 server to our Exchange 2010 server that we've had sitting in our IT offices for at least 2 1/2 years (don't ask). We're a little confused about auto-complete on clients after the migration. We have Office 2010 clients and Office 2003 sp3 clients (Exchange 2010 requires 2003 sp2 or above). I see where the nk2 files on the Office 2003 clients will cause issues after our migration for internal users who are trying to send emails to other internal users and will need to be deleted. Do we need to do something similar for our Office 2010 clients?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
tadashi posted:My company is finally getting around to migrating from our Exchange 2003 server to our Exchange 2010 server that we've had sitting in our IT offices for at least 2 1/2 years (don't ask). No. The first time office 2010 will open outlook post-migration, it will upgrade their nk2 file to the new server-side autocomplete. I feel like office 2003 and exchange 2010 doesn't work all the way but I don't think I've ever dealt with those two together personally.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 16:51 |
|
|
Upgrade Outlook 2003 first. I don't think it is compatible with Exchange 2007 or higher server side suggested contacts.
Internet Explorer fucked around with this message at 03:15 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 03:06
|
|
