'Bob', the ghost in Outlook2003 is playing with me!

[Guest]

New setup of Outlook2003 in Office2003.
My client uses an outside hosting company to host their mail server. We
setup each users Outlook 2003 for a new POP3 account - nothing strange,
straightforward.
(Their domain internal to their office is on MS SBS2003. It does NOT have
Exchange installed, so it is not a factor. I.e., the only mail service is
from outside.)
Anyway, everytime they open OL2003, and attempt to SEND/RECEIVE mail, their
individual accounts change the data in the user's email account in OL.
Specifically it appends email address data to the existing email User Account
field. It also changes the Incoming Mail Server field to localhost.
I know it's something simple that I missed, but I'm not seeing it.
Any help appreciated.

 

[Roady [MVP]]

Sounds like you have a virusscanner that integrates with Outlook causing
this. See the documentation of your virusscanner on how you can disable this
integration.

--
Robert Sparnaaij [MVP-Outlook]
www.howto-outlook.com

Tips of the month:
-FREE tool; QuickMail. Create new Outlook items anywhere from within Windows
-Properly back-up and restore your Outlook data

-----
New setup of Outlook2003 in Office2003.
My client uses an outside hosting company to host their mail server. We
setup each users Outlook 2003 for a new POP3 account - nothing strange,
straightforward.
(Their domain internal to their office is on MS SBS2003. It does NOT have
Exchange installed, so it is not a factor. I.e., the only mail service is
from outside.)
Anyway, everytime they open OL2003, and attempt to SEND/RECEIVE mail, their
individual accounts change the data in the user's email account in OL.
Specifically it appends email address data to the existing email User
Account
field. It also changes the Incoming Mail Server field to localhost.
I know it's something simple that I missed, but I'm not seeing it.
Any help appreciated.

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

In

New setup of Outlook2003 in Office2003.
My client uses an outside hosting company to host their mail server.
We setup each users Outlook 2003 for a new POP3 account - nothing
strange, straightforward.
(Their domain internal to their office is on MS SBS2003. It does NOT
have Exchange installed, so it is not a factor. I.e., the only mail
service is from outside.)
Anyway, everytime they open OL2003, and attempt to SEND/RECEIVE mail,
their individual accounts change the data in the user's email account
in OL. Specifically it appends email address data to the existing
email User Account field. It also changes the Incoming Mail Server
field to localhost.
I know it's something simple that I missed, but I'm not seeing it.
Any help appreciated.

In addition to Roady's reply - why not set up Exchange? They paid for it
already - and it will make this and many other things sooooo much easier.
Honestly, Exchange is one of the main reasons most people buy SBS in the
first place. Try posting in m.p.windows.server.sbs if you want help with it.

 

[Guest]

That was my suggestion; in fact I had it installed. But because they are on
the phone with their clients and need to read the emails (attachments) sent
to them from the person they are on the phone with (realtime), it doesn't
work. The most polling frequency for Exchange in SBS is every 15 minutes.
By haveing the outside servers, they can hit them and retrieve as they speak.
Unless you have a switch setting for bring the polling greq on Exchange down
to the range of 1 minute, I'm stuck.

 

[Guest]

And where do I find that 'm.p.windows.server.sbs"???

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

Try adding the server msnews.microsoft.com and then search for
microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs news group. I am assuming that you know
how to install and configure a real news reader as opposed to using that
horrible web interface?

--
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, King Richard asked:

| And where do I find that 'm.p.windows.server.sbs"???
|
| "King Richard" wrote:
|
|| That was my suggestion; in fact I had it installed. But because
|| they are on the phone with their clients and need to read the emails
|| (attachments) sent to them from the person they are on the phone
|| with (realtime), it doesn't work. The most polling frequency for
|| Exchange in SBS is every 15 minutes. By haveing the outside servers,
|| they can hit them and retrieve as they speak. Unless you have a
|| switch setting for bring the polling greq on Exchange down to the
|| range of 1 minute, I'm stuck.
||
|| "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:
||
|||
|||
||| In ||| King Richard <King (e-mail address removed)> typed:
|||| New setup of Outlook2003 in Office2003.
|||| My client uses an outside hosting company to host their mail
|||| server. We setup each users Outlook 2003 for a new POP3 account -
|||| nothing strange, straightforward.
|||| (Their domain internal to their office is on MS SBS2003. It does
|||| NOT have Exchange installed, so it is not a factor. I.e., the
|||| only mail service is from outside.)
|||| Anyway, everytime they open OL2003, and attempt to SEND/RECEIVE
|||| mail, their individual accounts change the data in the user's
|||| email account in OL. Specifically it appends email address data to
|||| the existing email User Account field. It also changes the
|||| Incoming Mail Server field to localhost.
|||| I know it's something simple that I missed, but I'm not seeing it.
|||| Any help appreciated.
|||
||| In addition to Roady's reply - why not set up Exchange? They paid
||| for it already - and it will make this and many other things sooooo
||| much easier. Honestly, Exchange is one of the main reasons most
||| people buy SBS in the first place. Try posting in
||| m.p.windows.server.sbs if you want help with it.

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

In

That was my suggestion; in fact I had it installed. But because they
are on the phone with their clients and need to read the emails
(attachments) sent to them from the person they are on the phone with
(realtime), it doesn't work. The most polling frequency for Exchange
in SBS is every 15 minutes. By haveing the outside servers, they can
hit them and retrieve as they speak. Unless you have a switch setting
for bring the polling greq on Exchange down to the range of 1 minute,
I'm stuck.

Ah, the dreaded POP connector. Host the mail directly on the server via SMTP
delivery & it's near instantaneous. You can do this even if they have a
dynamic public IP address, although a static is preferred. All they need is
a registered internet domain name. See
http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html for info on how this works,
but since you're on SBS, you need to use one of its myriad wizards (the
CEICW, or 'configure e-mail and internet connection wizard').

POP connectors are icky. Don't turn a mail server into a POP client -
servers are supposed to communicate via SMTP. If you set this up for the
client, they'll also be able to use OWA, and all the other cool
collaboration features like public folders, you can use the IMF to scan all
inbound mail for spamitude, etc. They'll love you.

One thing to note - if the server is offline/otherwise unavailable, you'll
want to have someone else acting as backup - see www.dyndns.org and MailHop
BackupMX or something similar. Nominal cost is worth it. Some ISPs do it for
free - some don't.

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

In

And where do I find that 'm.p.windows.server.sbs"???

microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs

Avoid the web interface to the newsgroups & try using a newsreader like
Outlook Express or Forte Agent instead - it's a lot easier to do nearly
everything there, including searching, which is always a good idea to do
before you post, as well as mark messages to be watched, and filter based on
replies to your posts.

The Microsoft public news server is msnews.microsoft.com and you can
subscribe to as many groups as you like.

 

[Guest]

I'm impressed! And thank you to all of you for the input. I believe we have
a solution.
If not, I'll...be...baaaaack!

Thanks again,

The King is leaving the Building.

 

[Guest]

Hope you're still listening.
When I set up the mail delievery via SMTP (which I believe I had the first
time around, but could be wrong), the setting options presented in the setup
for time interval of polling had a shortest period being 15 minutes. Did I
miss something? Or is there another way to shorten that to real-time.
(Remember, they prefer to have their public mail server outside at a third
party vendor. So any mail arriving there would be polled and downloaded to
the SBS Exchange; and vice-a-versa.)
Thanks in advance.

KR

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

In

Hope you're still listening.
When I set up the mail delievery via SMTP (which I believe I had the
first time around, but could be wrong), the setting options presented
in the setup for time interval of polling had a shortest period being
15 minutes. Did I miss something? Or is there another way to shorten
that to real-time. (Remember, they prefer to have their public mail
server outside at a third party vendor. So any mail arriving there
would be polled and downloaded to the SBS Exchange; and vice-a-versa.)
Thanks in advance.

KR

OK, but that defeats the entire purpose of what I'm 'splaining - not sure
you read my reply correctly. You're still talking about the POP connector,
which is what I'm saying you ought to avoid. They need to get off the
external mail server. Why do they think they need it? I bet I can rebut any
of their arguments. Their mail should be delivered directly, automatically,
to the Exchange server via SMTP. They *do* have a registered domain name,
right??

You cannot decrease the 15-minute interval in the POP connector....nor
should you. You can run into problems. You will run into other problems
merely by the fact they're using it. Ditch it. Ditch POP. They do not need
it, and it adds no benefit (there's nothing they can do this way that they
can't do another way).

Note - this topic has veered away from Outlook, so I'm setting the
followup-to group as microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs. Since you're using
the icky web interface to the groups, this may not work for you - and I
suggest using a newsreader like Outlook Express or Forte Agent instead.
It's a lot easier to do nearly everything there, including searching, which
is always a good idea to do before you post, as well as mark messages to be
watched, and filter based on replies to your posts.

The Microsoft public news server is msnews.microsoft.com and you can
subscribe to as many groups as you like.

 

[Guest]

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. I could go to the
newsgroup you suggested, but what brought me to this one was important to me.
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. 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.
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. 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.
Next, there are other security issues. This server is currently being used
as the PDC. 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.
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.
Finally, your 'espaining' is fine, but sometimes there simply are things
that are not overtly stated, for the obvious reasons (security). 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. 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

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

In

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.... ?

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

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.... ?

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

In

One small correction, the Corp/IMO modes only existed in OL 98 and
2000, they were dropped in OL 2002.

Better phrasing than what I wrote - that's exactly what I meant. Thanks,
Milly.

--
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

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.


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?


I assure you that I have no influence whatsoever with whomever
manages the Microsoft web interface to their public newsgroups!


No, but you don't have to use it. Anyway.


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.


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.


You can't demote an SBS server or it will not work. Don't try it. It
has to be a DC.


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.


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).


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.


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.... ?