|
|
|
date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:34:02 -0500,
group: microsoft.public.exchange.misc
back
Re: MSExchange2003
Lanwench,
Correct about SBS vs full Exchange.
As to what Loststone was actually asking, we won't know as he/she has
not come back.
On POP mail, POP may not be recommended from a [dated] purist
viewpoint, but I can assure you it has its applications in the real
world regardless of what we techs may think, and this is why there are
MANY products like SmartPOP2Exchange, not just the one.
We have two or three clients who each have two to three 4-6 people
offices in the same town. For those clients, the cheap and yet
foolproof and excellent method is indeed POP mail : 4 POP address for
this office, 6 POP addresses for this office, etc.., each office
having SBS, same domain, etc... The client does not have to go to the
expense of WAN, VPN, or whatever, and it gives them everything they
want. We're not a large IT company by any means and yet, just in our
case, 3 of our clients fit this model. And there must be a lot of
others out there for there to be so many POP-to-Exchange products :
http://www.slipstick.com/exs/popconnect.asp
Our largent clients of course use SMTP.
Karl.
"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
wrote in
message news:umWkz$BjIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Karl Strausser wrote:
> Hi Lostone,
>
> Assuming that you are talking about picking up both SMTP and POP
> mail,
> use Exchange to pick up SMTP mail, but use a product like
> SmartPOP2Exchange (JAM Software) to pick up POP mail. Exchange can
> only pick up POP mail every 15 minutes, whereas a product like
> SmartPOP2Exchange can pick up POP mail every minute.
>
> Karl
I don't think that's what he's asking - he's referring to clients
connecting
to the Exchange server via POP3. And note that POP connectors aren't
recommended - and Exchange has not native POP connector. You're
probably
thinking of SBS, which includes a POP connector - but that isn't part
of
Exchange, and it's not recommended either.
See http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_smtp_diatribe.htm
>
> "Lostone" wrote in message
> news:2858F63B-50C1-4EAA-AE55-C0CF76914B5E@microsoft.com...
> What is the default path for server 2003 servers when adding users
> using
> POP3 and SMTP.
>
> Is it Pop3-server.servername.com?
> Smtp-server.servername.com?
> Pop3 mail.servername.com?
> SMTP mail.servername.com?
>
> I am running 2003 server with 2003 Exchange and have set it up for
> pop3 and
> smtp.
> Yes I have alot of learning to do.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lostone
date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:54:54 -0000
author: Karl Strausser
Re: MSExchange2003
POP connectors are a great big kludge. Period.
--
Ed Crowley
MVP - Exchange
"Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
"Karl Strausser" wrote in message
news:1206478512.22552.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
> Lanwench,
>
> Correct about SBS vs full Exchange.
>
> As to what Loststone was actually asking, we won't know as he/she has
> not come back.
>
> On POP mail, POP may not be recommended from a [dated] purist
> viewpoint, but I can assure you it has its applications in the real
> world regardless of what we techs may think, and this is why there are
> MANY products like SmartPOP2Exchange, not just the one.
>
> We have two or three clients who each have two to three 4-6 people
> offices in the same town. For those clients, the cheap and yet
> foolproof and excellent method is indeed POP mail : 4 POP address for
> this office, 6 POP addresses for this office, etc.., each office
> having SBS, same domain, etc... The client does not have to go to the
> expense of WAN, VPN, or whatever, and it gives them everything they
> want. We're not a large IT company by any means and yet, just in our
> case, 3 of our clients fit this model. And there must be a lot of
> others out there for there to be so many POP-to-Exchange products :
>
> http://www.slipstick.com/exs/popconnect.asp
>
> Our largent clients of course use SMTP.
>
>
> Karl.
>
>
> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> wrote in
> message news:umWkz$BjIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Karl Strausser wrote:
>> Hi Lostone,
>>
>> Assuming that you are talking about picking up both SMTP and POP
>> mail,
>> use Exchange to pick up SMTP mail, but use a product like
>> SmartPOP2Exchange (JAM Software) to pick up POP mail. Exchange can
>> only pick up POP mail every 15 minutes, whereas a product like
>> SmartPOP2Exchange can pick up POP mail every minute.
>>
>> Karl
>
> I don't think that's what he's asking - he's referring to clients
> connecting
> to the Exchange server via POP3. And note that POP connectors aren't
> recommended - and Exchange has not native POP connector. You're
> probably
> thinking of SBS, which includes a POP connector - but that isn't part
> of
> Exchange, and it's not recommended either.
>
> See http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_smtp_diatribe.htm
>
>>
>> "Lostone" wrote in message
>> news:2858F63B-50C1-4EAA-AE55-C0CF76914B5E@microsoft.com...
>> What is the default path for server 2003 servers when adding users
>> using
>> POP3 and SMTP.
>>
>> Is it Pop3-server.servername.com?
>> Smtp-server.servername.com?
>> Pop3 mail.servername.com?
>> SMTP mail.servername.com?
>>
>> I am running 2003 server with 2003 Exchange and have set it up for
>> pop3 and
>> smtp.
>> Yes I have alot of learning to do.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Lostone
>
>
>
>
date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:58:44 -0700
author: Ed Crowley [MVP]
Re: MSExchange2003
And so what ? So was VHS vs Betamax. Period!
Horses for courses, ie. flexibility. Live in the real world and test
it before commenting because that comment shows you have not seen it
in the real world.
Even a 2.5GHz with 2Gb of RAM has no problems, let alone a dual-core
6GHz (2x3) with 4GB of RAM.
Karl
"Ed Crowley [MVP]" wrote in message
news:ODLsIvsjIHA.1744@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
POP connectors are a great big kludge. Period.
--
Ed Crowley
MVP - Exchange
"Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
"Karl Strausser" wrote in message
news:1206478512.22552.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
> Lanwench,
>
> Correct about SBS vs full Exchange.
>
> As to what Loststone was actually asking, we won't know as he/she
> has
> not come back.
>
> On POP mail, POP may not be recommended from a [dated] purist
> viewpoint, but I can assure you it has its applications in the real
> world regardless of what we techs may think, and this is why there
> are
> MANY products like SmartPOP2Exchange, not just the one.
>
> We have two or three clients who each have two to three 4-6 people
> offices in the same town. For those clients, the cheap and yet
> foolproof and excellent method is indeed POP mail : 4 POP address
> for
> this office, 6 POP addresses for this office, etc.., each office
> having SBS, same domain, etc... The client does not have to go to
> the
> expense of WAN, VPN, or whatever, and it gives them everything they
> want. We're not a large IT company by any means and yet, just in
> our
> case, 3 of our clients fit this model. And there must be a lot of
> others out there for there to be so many POP-to-Exchange products :
>
> http://www.slipstick.com/exs/popconnect.asp
>
> Our largent clients of course use SMTP.
>
>
> Karl.
>
>
> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> wrote in
> message news:umWkz$BjIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Karl Strausser wrote:
>> Hi Lostone,
>>
>> Assuming that you are talking about picking up both SMTP and POP
>> mail,
>> use Exchange to pick up SMTP mail, but use a product like
>> SmartPOP2Exchange (JAM Software) to pick up POP mail. Exchange can
>> only pick up POP mail every 15 minutes, whereas a product like
>> SmartPOP2Exchange can pick up POP mail every minute.
>>
>> Karl
>
> I don't think that's what he's asking - he's referring to clients
> connecting
> to the Exchange server via POP3. And note that POP connectors aren't
> recommended - and Exchange has not native POP connector. You're
> probably
> thinking of SBS, which includes a POP connector - but that isn't
> part
> of
> Exchange, and it's not recommended either.
>
> See http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_smtp_diatribe.htm
>
>>
>> "Lostone" wrote in message
>> news:2858F63B-50C1-4EAA-AE55-C0CF76914B5E@microsoft.com...
>> What is the default path for server 2003 servers when adding users
>> using
>> POP3 and SMTP.
>>
>> Is it Pop3-server.servername.com?
>> Smtp-server.servername.com?
>> Pop3 mail.servername.com?
>> SMTP mail.servername.com?
>>
>> I am running 2003 server with 2003 Exchange and have set it up for
>> pop3 and
>> smtp.
>> Yes I have alot of learning to do.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Lostone
>
>
>
>
date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:13:42 -0000
author: Karl Strausser
Re: MSExchange2003
Neither VHS nor Betamax were a great big kludge. Both VHS and Betamax were
designed to record and playback video. POP3 was designed as a
client-to-server single mailbox retrieveal protocol, whereas SMTP was
designed as a mail transport protocol. That's why POP3 doesn't work well as
a multiple-user mail transport tool. As to your personal comment about my
not having seen it in the real world, how about you read the respective
Internet RFCs for the two protocols and then comment back from a position of
authority?
--
Ed Crowley
MVP - Exchange
"Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
"Karl Strausser" wrote in message
news:1206562444.32031.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
> And so what ? So was VHS vs Betamax. Period!
>
> Horses for courses, ie. flexibility. Live in the real world and test
> it before commenting because that comment shows you have not seen it
> in the real world.
>
> Even a 2.5GHz with 2Gb of RAM has no problems, let alone a dual-core
> 6GHz (2x3) with 4GB of RAM.
>
>
> Karl
>
>
> "Ed Crowley [MVP]" wrote in message
> news:ODLsIvsjIHA.1744@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> POP connectors are a great big kludge. Period.
> --
> Ed Crowley
> MVP - Exchange
> "Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
>
> "Karl Strausser" wrote in message
> news:1206478512.22552.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>> Lanwench,
>>
>> Correct about SBS vs full Exchange.
>>
>> As to what Loststone was actually asking, we won't know as he/she
>> has
>> not come back.
>>
>> On POP mail, POP may not be recommended from a [dated] purist
>> viewpoint, but I can assure you it has its applications in the real
>> world regardless of what we techs may think, and this is why there
>> are
>> MANY products like SmartPOP2Exchange, not just the one.
>>
>> We have two or three clients who each have two to three 4-6 people
>> offices in the same town. For those clients, the cheap and yet
>> foolproof and excellent method is indeed POP mail : 4 POP address
>> for
>> this office, 6 POP addresses for this office, etc.., each office
>> having SBS, same domain, etc... The client does not have to go to
>> the
>> expense of WAN, VPN, or whatever, and it gives them everything they
>> want. We're not a large IT company by any means and yet, just in
>> our
>> case, 3 of our clients fit this model. And there must be a lot of
>> others out there for there to be so many POP-to-Exchange products :
>>
>> http://www.slipstick.com/exs/popconnect.asp
>>
>> Our largent clients of course use SMTP.
>>
>>
>> Karl.
>>
>>
>> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
>> wrote in
>> message news:umWkz$BjIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Karl Strausser wrote:
>>> Hi Lostone,
>>>
>>> Assuming that you are talking about picking up both SMTP and POP
>>> mail,
>>> use Exchange to pick up SMTP mail, but use a product like
>>> SmartPOP2Exchange (JAM Software) to pick up POP mail. Exchange can
>>> only pick up POP mail every 15 minutes, whereas a product like
>>> SmartPOP2Exchange can pick up POP mail every minute.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>
>> I don't think that's what he's asking - he's referring to clients
>> connecting
>> to the Exchange server via POP3. And note that POP connectors aren't
>> recommended - and Exchange has not native POP connector. You're
>> probably
>> thinking of SBS, which includes a POP connector - but that isn't
>> part
>> of
>> Exchange, and it's not recommended either.
>>
>> See http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_smtp_diatribe.htm
>>
>>>
>>> "Lostone" wrote in message
>>> news:2858F63B-50C1-4EAA-AE55-C0CF76914B5E@microsoft.com...
>>> What is the default path for server 2003 servers when adding users
>>> using
>>> POP3 and SMTP.
>>>
>>> Is it Pop3-server.servername.com?
>>> Smtp-server.servername.com?
>>> Pop3 mail.servername.com?
>>> SMTP mail.servername.com?
>>>
>>> I am running 2003 server with 2003 Exchange and have set it up for
>>> pop3 and
>>> smtp.
>>> Yes I have alot of learning to do.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Lostone
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:10:06 -0700
author: Ed Crowley [MVP]
Re: MSExchange2003
Ed,
In this message you simply confirm that you have not tried it and
actually run diagnositcs - "kludge" is a word you would remove if you
had ACTUALLY tried it. I speak from a position of having used it in
situations that warranted it and I know the reality of it regardless
of Internet RFCs.
There is no point referring to the Internet RFC for the two protocols.
Live in the real world where actual companies need it in preference to
thousands of dollars spent on relays, WANs, VPNs, etc...
As has been said throughout this thread, this is about the real world,
real scenarios, real solutions, and above all, REAL tests, not
reasoning based on Internet RFCs.
Karl
"Ed Crowley [MVP]" wrote in message
news:%231aXMd6jIHA.4940@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Neither VHS nor Betamax were a great big kludge. Both VHS and Betamax
were
designed to record and playback video. POP3 was designed as a
client-to-server single mailbox retrieveal protocol, whereas SMTP was
designed as a mail transport protocol. That's why POP3 doesn't work
well as
a multiple-user mail transport tool. As to your personal comment
about my
not having seen it in the real world, how about you read the
respective
Internet RFCs for the two protocols and then comment back from a
position of
authority?
--
Ed Crowley
MVP - Exchange
"Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
"Karl Strausser" wrote in message
news:1206562444.32031.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
> And so what ? So was VHS vs Betamax. Period!
>
> Horses for courses, ie. flexibility. Live in the real world and
> test
> it before commenting because that comment shows you have not seen it
> in the real world.
>
> Even a 2.5GHz with 2Gb of RAM has no problems, let alone a dual-core
> 6GHz (2x3) with 4GB of RAM.
>
>
> Karl
>
>
> "Ed Crowley [MVP]" wrote in message
> news:ODLsIvsjIHA.1744@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> POP connectors are a great big kludge. Period.
> --
> Ed Crowley
> MVP - Exchange
> "Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
>
> "Karl Strausser" wrote in message
> news:1206478512.22552.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>> Lanwench,
>>
>> Correct about SBS vs full Exchange.
>>
>> As to what Loststone was actually asking, we won't know as he/she
>> has
>> not come back.
>>
>> On POP mail, POP may not be recommended from a [dated] purist
>> viewpoint, but I can assure you it has its applications in the real
>> world regardless of what we techs may think, and this is why there
>> are
>> MANY products like SmartPOP2Exchange, not just the one.
>>
>> We have two or three clients who each have two to three 4-6 people
>> offices in the same town. For those clients, the cheap and yet
>> foolproof and excellent method is indeed POP mail : 4 POP address
>> for
>> this office, 6 POP addresses for this office, etc.., each office
>> having SBS, same domain, etc... The client does not have to go to
>> the
>> expense of WAN, VPN, or whatever, and it gives them everything they
>> want. We're not a large IT company by any means and yet, just in
>> our
>> case, 3 of our clients fit this model. And there must be a lot of
>> others out there for there to be so many POP-to-Exchange products :
>>
>> http://www.slipstick.com/exs/popconnect.asp
>>
>> Our largent clients of course use SMTP.
>>
>>
>> Karl.
>>
>>
>> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
>> wrote in
>> message news:umWkz$BjIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Karl Strausser wrote:
>>> Hi Lostone,
>>>
>>> Assuming that you are talking about picking up both SMTP and POP
>>> mail,
>>> use Exchange to pick up SMTP mail, but use a product like
>>> SmartPOP2Exchange (JAM Software) to pick up POP mail. Exchange
>>> can
>>> only pick up POP mail every 15 minutes, whereas a product like
>>> SmartPOP2Exchange can pick up POP mail every minute.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>
>> I don't think that's what he's asking - he's referring to clients
>> connecting
>> to the Exchange server via POP3. And note that POP connectors
>> aren't
>> recommended - and Exchange has not native POP connector. You're
>> probably
>> thinking of SBS, which includes a POP connector - but that isn't
>> part
>> of
>> Exchange, and it's not recommended either.
>>
>> See http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_smtp_diatribe.htm
>>
>>>
>>> "Lostone" wrote in message
>>> news:2858F63B-50C1-4EAA-AE55-C0CF76914B5E@microsoft.com...
>>> What is the default path for server 2003 servers when adding users
>>> using
>>> POP3 and SMTP.
>>>
>>> Is it Pop3-server.servername.com?
>>> Smtp-server.servername.com?
>>> Pop3 mail.servername.com?
>>> SMTP mail.servername.com?
>>>
>>> I am running 2003 server with 2003 Exchange and have set it up for
>>> pop3 and
>>> smtp.
>>> Yes I have alot of learning to do.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Lostone
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:52:07 -0000
author: Karl Strausser
Re: MSExchange2003
Inline.
--
Ed Crowley
MVP - Exchange
"Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
"Karl Strausser" wrote in message
news:1206647548.16506.0@proxy02.news.clara.net...
> Ed,
>
> In this message you simply confirm that you have not tried it and
> actually run diagnositcs -
I did not say that even if it is true. There are plenty of stupid ideas I
won't try.
> "kludge" is a word you would remove if you
> had ACTUALLY tried it.
You would be wrong. I've been working Exchange support lists since before
Exchange 4.0 was released, and I've seen thousands of posts reporting
problems with kludgy POP3 connectors, and I've participated in mailing lists
that have been spammed by malfunctioning POP3 connectors. If you read and
understand the POP RFC 1939 (Standard 53) then you would understand what I'm
talking about. That protocol simply wasn't designed to do what it's being
asked to do, so when problems occur it's not hard to see why.
> I speak from a position of having used it in
> situations that warranted it and I know the reality of it regardless
> of Internet RFCs.
Many people have wired their homes with lamp cord. It doesn't make it the
right thing to do. Just because it works doesn't make it a great big
kludge.
> There is no point referring to the Internet RFC for the two protocols.
> Live in the real world where actual companies need it in preference to
> thousands of dollars spent on relays, WANs, VPNs, etc...
A POP3 connector does nothing to replace relays, WANs, VPNs, etc... You're
comparing apples and oranges.
> As has been said throughout this thread, this is about the real world,
> real scenarios, real solutions, and above all, REAL tests, not
> reasoning based on Internet RFCs.
That would be the last bastion of ignorance.
> Karl
>
>
> "Ed Crowley [MVP]" wrote in message
> news:%231aXMd6jIHA.4940@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Neither VHS nor Betamax were a great big kludge. Both VHS and Betamax
> were
> designed to record and playback video. POP3 was designed as a
> client-to-server single mailbox retrieveal protocol, whereas SMTP was
> designed as a mail transport protocol. That's why POP3 doesn't work
> well as
> a multiple-user mail transport tool. As to your personal comment
> about my
> not having seen it in the real world, how about you read the
> respective
> Internet RFCs for the two protocols and then comment back from a
> position of
> authority?
> --
> Ed Crowley
> MVP - Exchange
> "Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
>
> "Karl Strausser" wrote in message
> news:1206562444.32031.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>> And so what ? So was VHS vs Betamax. Period!
>>
>> Horses for courses, ie. flexibility. Live in the real world and
>> test
>> it before commenting because that comment shows you have not seen it
>> in the real world.
>>
>> Even a 2.5GHz with 2Gb of RAM has no problems, let alone a dual-core
>> 6GHz (2x3) with 4GB of RAM.
>>
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> "Ed Crowley [MVP]" wrote in message
>> news:ODLsIvsjIHA.1744@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> POP connectors are a great big kludge. Period.
>> --
>> Ed Crowley
>> MVP - Exchange
>> "Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
>>
>> "Karl Strausser" wrote in message
>> news:1206478512.22552.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>>> Lanwench,
>>>
>>> Correct about SBS vs full Exchange.
>>>
>>> As to what Loststone was actually asking, we won't know as he/she
>>> has
>>> not come back.
>>>
>>> On POP mail, POP may not be recommended from a [dated] purist
>>> viewpoint, but I can assure you it has its applications in the real
>>> world regardless of what we techs may think, and this is why there
>>> are
>>> MANY products like SmartPOP2Exchange, not just the one.
>>>
>>> We have two or three clients who each have two to three 4-6 people
>>> offices in the same town. For those clients, the cheap and yet
>>> foolproof and excellent method is indeed POP mail : 4 POP address
>>> for
>>> this office, 6 POP addresses for this office, etc.., each office
>>> having SBS, same domain, etc... The client does not have to go to
>>> the
>>> expense of WAN, VPN, or whatever, and it gives them everything they
>>> want. We're not a large IT company by any means and yet, just in
>>> our
>>> case, 3 of our clients fit this model. And there must be a lot of
>>> others out there for there to be so many POP-to-Exchange products :
>>>
>>> http://www.slipstick.com/exs/popconnect.asp
>>>
>>> Our largent clients of course use SMTP.
>>>
>>>
>>> Karl.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
>>> wrote in
>>> message news:umWkz$BjIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Karl Strausser wrote:
>>>> Hi Lostone,
>>>>
>>>> Assuming that you are talking about picking up both SMTP and POP
>>>> mail,
>>>> use Exchange to pick up SMTP mail, but use a product like
>>>> SmartPOP2Exchange (JAM Software) to pick up POP mail. Exchange
>>>> can
>>>> only pick up POP mail every 15 minutes, whereas a product like
>>>> SmartPOP2Exchange can pick up POP mail every minute.
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>
>>> I don't think that's what he's asking - he's referring to clients
>>> connecting
>>> to the Exchange server via POP3. And note that POP connectors
>>> aren't
>>> recommended - and Exchange has not native POP connector. You're
>>> probably
>>> thinking of SBS, which includes a POP connector - but that isn't
>>> part
>>> of
>>> Exchange, and it's not recommended either.
>>>
>>> See http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_smtp_diatribe.htm
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Lostone" wrote in message
>>>> news:2858F63B-50C1-4EAA-AE55-C0CF76914B5E@microsoft.com...
>>>> What is the default path for server 2003 servers when adding users
>>>> using
>>>> POP3 and SMTP.
>>>>
>>>> Is it Pop3-server.servername.com?
>>>> Smtp-server.servername.com?
>>>> Pop3 mail.servername.com?
>>>> SMTP mail.servername.com?
>>>>
>>>> I am running 2003 server with 2003 Exchange and have set it up for
>>>> pop3 and
>>>> smtp.
>>>> Yes I have alot of learning to do.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Lostone
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 14:17:39 -0700
author: Ed Crowley [MVP]
Re: MSExchange2003
I meant to say:
Many people have wired their homes with lamp cord. It doesn't make it the
right thing to do. Just because it works doesn't mean it's not a great big
kludge.
--
Ed Crowley
MVP - Exchange
"Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
"Ed Crowley [MVP]" wrote in message
news:%23l759$EkIHA.5080@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Inline.
> --
> Ed Crowley
> MVP - Exchange
> "Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
>
> "Karl Strausser" wrote in message
> news:1206647548.16506.0@proxy02.news.clara.net...
>> Ed,
>>
>> In this message you simply confirm that you have not tried it and
>> actually run diagnositcs -
>
> I did not say that even if it is true. There are plenty of stupid ideas I
> won't try.
>
>> "kludge" is a word you would remove if you
>> had ACTUALLY tried it.
>
> You would be wrong. I've been working Exchange support lists since before
> Exchange 4.0 was released, and I've seen thousands of posts reporting
> problems with kludgy POP3 connectors, and I've participated in mailing
> lists that have been spammed by malfunctioning POP3 connectors. If you
> read and understand the POP RFC 1939 (Standard 53) then you would
> understand what I'm talking about. That protocol simply wasn't designed
> to do what it's being asked to do, so when problems occur it's not hard to
> see why.
>
>> I speak from a position of having used it in
>> situations that warranted it and I know the reality of it regardless
>> of Internet RFCs.
>
> Many people have wired their homes with lamp cord. It doesn't make it the
> right thing to do. Just because it works doesn't make it a great big
> kludge.
>
>> There is no point referring to the Internet RFC for the two protocols.
>> Live in the real world where actual companies need it in preference to
>> thousands of dollars spent on relays, WANs, VPNs, etc...
>
> A POP3 connector does nothing to replace relays, WANs, VPNs, etc...
> You're comparing apples and oranges.
>
>> As has been said throughout this thread, this is about the real world,
>> real scenarios, real solutions, and above all, REAL tests, not
>> reasoning based on Internet RFCs.
>
> That would be the last bastion of ignorance.
>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> "Ed Crowley [MVP]" wrote in message
>> news:%231aXMd6jIHA.4940@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Neither VHS nor Betamax were a great big kludge. Both VHS and Betamax
>> were
>> designed to record and playback video. POP3 was designed as a
>> client-to-server single mailbox retrieveal protocol, whereas SMTP was
>> designed as a mail transport protocol. That's why POP3 doesn't work
>> well as
>> a multiple-user mail transport tool. As to your personal comment
>> about my
>> not having seen it in the real world, how about you read the
>> respective
>> Internet RFCs for the two protocols and then comment back from a
>> position of
>> authority?
>> --
>> Ed Crowley
>> MVP - Exchange
>> "Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
>>
>> "Karl Strausser" wrote in message
>> news:1206562444.32031.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>>> And so what ? So was VHS vs Betamax. Period!
>>>
>>> Horses for courses, ie. flexibility. Live in the real world and
>>> test
>>> it before commenting because that comment shows you have not seen it
>>> in the real world.
>>>
>>> Even a 2.5GHz with 2Gb of RAM has no problems, let alone a dual-core
>>> 6GHz (2x3) with 4GB of RAM.
>>>
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>
>>> "Ed Crowley [MVP]" wrote in message
>>> news:ODLsIvsjIHA.1744@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> POP connectors are a great big kludge. Period.
>>> --
>>> Ed Crowley
>>> MVP - Exchange
>>> "Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
>>>
>>> "Karl Strausser" wrote in message
>>> news:1206478512.22552.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>>>> Lanwench,
>>>>
>>>> Correct about SBS vs full Exchange.
>>>>
>>>> As to what Loststone was actually asking, we won't know as he/she
>>>> has
>>>> not come back.
>>>>
>>>> On POP mail, POP may not be recommended from a [dated] purist
>>>> viewpoint, but I can assure you it has its applications in the real
>>>> world regardless of what we techs may think, and this is why there
>>>> are
>>>> MANY products like SmartPOP2Exchange, not just the one.
>>>>
>>>> We have two or three clients who each have two to three 4-6 people
>>>> offices in the same town. For those clients, the cheap and yet
>>>> foolproof and excellent method is indeed POP mail : 4 POP address
>>>> for
>>>> this office, 6 POP addresses for this office, etc.., each office
>>>> having SBS, same domain, etc... The client does not have to go to
>>>> the
>>>> expense of WAN, VPN, or whatever, and it gives them everything they
>>>> want. We're not a large IT company by any means and yet, just in
>>>> our
>>>> case, 3 of our clients fit this model. And there must be a lot of
>>>> others out there for there to be so many POP-to-Exchange products :
>>>>
>>>> http://www.slipstick.com/exs/popconnect.asp
>>>>
>>>> Our largent clients of course use SMTP.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Karl.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
>>>> wrote in
>>>> message news:umWkz$BjIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> Karl Strausser wrote:
>>>>> Hi Lostone,
>>>>>
>>>>> Assuming that you are talking about picking up both SMTP and POP
>>>>> mail,
>>>>> use Exchange to pick up SMTP mail, but use a product like
>>>>> SmartPOP2Exchange (JAM Software) to pick up POP mail. Exchange
>>>>> can
>>>>> only pick up POP mail every 15 minutes, whereas a product like
>>>>> SmartPOP2Exchange can pick up POP mail every minute.
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>> I don't think that's what he's asking - he's referring to clients
>>>> connecting
>>>> to the Exchange server via POP3. And note that POP connectors
>>>> aren't
>>>> recommended - and Exchange has not native POP connector. You're
>>>> probably
>>>> thinking of SBS, which includes a POP connector - but that isn't
>>>> part
>>>> of
>>>> Exchange, and it's not recommended either.
>>>>
>>>> See http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_smtp_diatribe.htm
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Lostone" wrote in message
>>>>> news:2858F63B-50C1-4EAA-AE55-C0CF76914B5E@microsoft.com...
>>>>> What is the default path for server 2003 servers when adding users
>>>>> using
>>>>> POP3 and SMTP.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it Pop3-server.servername.com?
>>>>> Smtp-server.servername.com?
>>>>> Pop3 mail.servername.com?
>>>>> SMTP mail.servername.com?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am running 2003 server with 2003 Exchange and have set it up for
>>>>> pop3 and
>>>>> smtp.
>>>>> Yes I have alot of learning to do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Lostone
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 14:24:47 -0700
author: Ed Crowley [MVP]
|
|
