|
Bob Morales posted:I wanted to setup an auto-reply to a recipient in Outlook 2013. We have a vendor that emails us service requests, and we have to reply with something along the lines of 'we accept this request'. Pretty simple. But Outlook will only reply to the same sender once if you're using a rule. I'm pretty sure you can use a transport rule, but you should cross your fingers and hope they don't set up something similar on their side. There's a reason why OOO requests only trigger once. If you have a ticketing system in place, is there any good reason you don't just send directly to that and have that send the "request accepted" response?
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 07:57 |
|
|
Unless I am completely misunderstanding your question, what you want is a Client Access Services (CAS) server. Now can you get me a job with AWS? 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2017 23:33
|
|
|
Oh come on, it would have been a perfect  moment.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
I don't know what the approved method for handling that problem is when using subdomains, other than like Thanks Ants said, using a SAN cert that includes both FQDNs, but I would approach the problem similar to how I would approach it when using a .local domain. Split-brain DNS - an internal DNS server that has a mycompany.com domain that points to the internal IP of MX1.int.mycompany.com. Or possibly NAT loopback? I think either solution would work. I'd go the NAT loopback route first, easiest to set up with the least amount of drawbacks.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Because users can't be trusted to do anything with information. Use DMARC. Use whatever Barracuda's version of Impersonation Protection is.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
It is like SPF where if the other side does not have it set up you cannot leverage it. That is where something like Mimecast's Impersonation Protection comes into play.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2019 00:35
|
|
|
Yes, do not send mass mailings from your email server.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2019 00:43
|
|
|
Alright, bit of a hail mary as I am out of my depth here. Troubleshooting an issue that I don't have much info on. We're hybrid Exchange and apparently 3 old users are coming back and when they got re-provisioned, something went wrong to the point where on-prem Exchange thinks it's an O365 mailbox and there's no mailbox in O365. Confirmed the account was synced to O365 and is properly licensed. It's not a matter of it having been provisioned in O365 first, as when I try to get the ExchangeGUID there it doesn't see a mailbox. I noticed that there are some extra X500/x500 addresses, but I don't think that would cause a mailbox not to create in O365. I can't attempt to migrate the mailbox either direction because of the confusion. I don't need to save anything in anyone's mailboxes. I have a feeling they were migrated from O365 to on-prem when they were retired back in the day, then that database was offlined at some point. Is there any good way to just tell on-prem Exchange "this is an on-prem mailbox now" and then migrate it to O365 again? Or somehow force O365 to try creating the mailbox again?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
George H.W. oval office posted:Delete the Exchange GUID stuff in AD if its there and rerun whatever script you have that provisions a mailbox and makes it a remote mailbox. The link you shared has an Exchange GUID in O365, which is something we were missing. As to your comment, is deleting the Exchange GUID in AD enough to have Exchange no longer think the user has a mailbox? We ended up deleting these accounts and recreating them. That fixed the problem, but at the time I was trying to figure out exactly what caused it. Oh well, next time!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2021 21:40
|
|
|
That's a way better solution than embedding it into the message. We don't use such a banner currently, but I would be way more accepting of this than the current way it's done. Thanks for sharing. [Edit: Just noticed it's not available in Outlook for Windows yet. Kind of odd. I am sure that is coming soon, will hold off until then.] Internet Explorer fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Mar 5, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/5/22316189/microsoft-exchange-server-security-exploit-china-attack-30000-organizationsquote:“if you’re running Exchange and you haven’t patched this yet, there’s a very high chance that your organization is already compromised.”
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2021 20:34
|
|
|
The whole thing has put me into "HTTP/S and SMTP gets blocked inbound for our Exchange server now. All it does is management and internal mail relay."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2021 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 07:57 |
|
|
Bob Morales posted:A ticket came in: Allow Access to Outlook Web Access only from US And to think, it could be as easy as a click of a button. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/active-directory/conditional-access/howto-conditional-access-policy-location
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2021 21:04
|
|