Re: E-mail woes
- From: "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" <lanwench@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:38:51 -0500
In news:OIVOtXqMGHA.2560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Andrew M. Saucci, Jr. <spam-only@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> typed:
We had a meeting with Mr. X and the client today. X suggested
defragging the hard drives and installing Outlook 2003 on the
workstations (already at Outlook 2002) to resolve e-mail issues,
Well, Outlook 203 is much better, and I would go for that anyway.
among other things. He also insisted that every bit of software
needed to be absolutely current (which is a narrow-minded,
inconsiderate attitude common among web developers; they need to
learn about backward compatibility).
Well, I don't know how old some of your software is, but I do like people to
keep relatively current myself. Regardless, what does this guy have to do
with your internal network anyway? Why is he even there?
The only thing he said that made
any sense was that he knew nothing about IT. He demonstrated this
very clearly. I'm more convinced now that we have to divorce the
e-mail from his web hosting service and let him stick to web
development (which he does well, actually-- the web site is nice and
I like it very much). Whether that's doable is still a mystery. We're
going to create another domain and e-mail address for the web-based
forms and pull that into the workstations via POP3, but he still
seems to want to host the existing domain as well.
Don't use POP. Anywhere. Really. Host the mail directly on your Exchange
server - for *all* your Internet mail domains.
"Andrew M. Saucci, Jr." <spam-only@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eggag9pLGHA.3936@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks for the input. I had a low opinion of Mr. X before,
and these responses have done nothing to help his cause. I too have
many clients with an A record pointing to an externally hosted web
site and the MX pointing at the SBS. Unfortunately, I don't know if
Mr. X will bend, and I'm not in a position to fire him. Sigh.
"Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:O%23X9XfjLGHA.2876@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I expect that Mr X is using a shared web server with a couple of
thousand other web developers. He is likely to have a control panel
that adds a website and the DNS entries to the server farm which
takes control of the DNS. He is right to say that email links will
not work in this situation but he has gone about it the wrong way.
The most sensible approach would have been to setup the web hosting
so that the server farm did not have any email resources or DNS
resources for the domain in question. Then when his web scripts
send email to the clients domain they won't get caught by the local
mail servers. Another way to do this is to allow the Exchange
server to relay for the web server that runs the web scripts and he
could use the IP number of the Exchange server as the SMTP server
setting in his web scripts.
There are many ways to achieve this without disrupting the SMTP
feed to the Exchange server but I would put the mail delivery back
as it was, change the A record for WWW to Mr X's web server and let
him get educated in sending email from his web farm.
"Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]" <kweilbacMVP@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:uFb9w3fLGHA.500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To say that Mr X is a complete idiot may be an understatement. No,
it does not make any sense at all. He has caused your client to
take two giant steps backwards. Contracting with a web developer
to develop a web site is one thing, but insisting that you move it
and your email to his server is plain stupid. I have many accounts
where their web site is hosted externally, and we use SBS to
handle the mail via SMTP, and not POP3.
--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"
"Andrew M. Saucci, Jr." <spam-only@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:%23Dq4BZeLGHA.3104@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I just wanted some opinions on e-mail configuration. We
had a client using SBS with his MX pointed directly to his
server, and it worked
fine for years. A few months ago, he contracted with a web
developer to host
his web site. The web developer (who we shall call Mr. X)
insisted that the
e-mail links in the web site would not work unless the DNS was
transferred
to X's DNS machine and POP3 accounts were created. He said he had
to have a
"real" mail server for everything to work correctly. I tried to
reason with
Mr. X and our client, but X insisted that it had to be done his
way-- just
pointing www.client.com to X's server wouldn't be sufficient, and
it had to
be POP3. Does this make any sense at all? What might X be trying
to do that
can't be done unless he hosts the e-mail? Ever since Mr. X got
involved we've had all sorts of mysterious e-mail problems there
that have taken lots
of time to troubleshoot, and meanwhile everything was working
fine before that. Besides, with the POP3 Connector, the mail
takes as long as 15 minutes
to arrive. (I know about POP Beamer and may still use it there if
I have to.) I really would like to put everything back the way it
was-- the way everyone here seems to think an SBS should be set
up-- but I'm going to need
some solid facts if I'm to have any chance of explaining why X's
approach isn't the only way. Right now, all I have is X claiming
that it just has to
be POP3.
.
- References:
- E-mail woes
- From: Andrew M. Saucci, Jr.
- Re: E-mail woes
- From: Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
- Re: E-mail woes
- From: Arthur
- Re: E-mail woes
- From: Andrew M. Saucci, Jr.
- Re: E-mail woes
- From: Andrew M. Saucci, Jr.
- E-mail woes
- Prev by Date: RE: SQL Enterprise Manager Connection Problem
- Next by Date: Re: Help with 2nd Office
- Previous by thread: Re: E-mail woes
- Next by thread: New SBS Server
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
