Ureader.com  
Microsoft software help and Community
   home   |   control panel login   |   archive   |  
 
Exchange
2000.active.directory
2000.admin
2000.announcements
2000.app.conversion
2000.applications
2000.clients
2000.clustering
2000.connectivity
2000.development
2000.documentation
2000.general
2000.information.store
2000.interop
2000.kms
2000.misc
2000.protocols
2000.realtime.collabo.
2000.setup
2000.transport
2000.win2000
admin
application.conversion
applications
clients
clustering
connectivity
design
development
misc
mobility
setup
tools
  
 
date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:11:51 -0800,    group: microsoft.public.exchange2000.development        back       


Recommended Programming interface for Exchange mailboxes   
I am updating a number of older VB6 programs that were written using CDO 
1.21 to perform various tasks against Exchange 5.5 and 2000 mailboxes. I 
plan to rewrite them in C# with Visual Studio 2005. Exchange 2003 is still a 
year away for us, so the new applications must use features and interfaces 
available in Exchange 2000.

Most of these applications run on an application server and use privileged 
accounts to log on to multiple mailboxes. The applications use the dynamic 
profile capability of CDO 1.21 (servername & vblf & mailboxX500dn) to allow 
them to logon to multiple mailboxes without the need for pre-configured MAPI 
profiles.

Each of these applications need the ability to read messages and their 
properties, send messages saving to the Sent Items folders, and often access 
properties of the CDO session object, address entries, folders and messages

Using CDO 1.21 as a COM component in a C# application is probably not a good 
long-term solution for these applications.

From the reading I've done, it looks like WebDAV is the best fit given my 
requirements, but I have looked at some samples, and I must say looks very 
obscure and non-intuitive.

I'd be interested in any feedback from the group on a recommended approach 
to updating these applications.

Thanks in advance for any feedback.

Steve
date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:11:51 -0800   author:   Steve Smith

Re: Recommended Programming interface for Exchange mailboxes   
Hello,

WebDAV is indeed a solution. And you are right: It not very intuitive :-) If 
your application can run on the Exchange server, CdoEXM or CDOEx is another 
option.

See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/813349/en-us for a list of supported 
interfaces.

Take a look at the examples on MSDN 
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/e2k3/e2k3/_esdk_key_tasks.asp) and 
the official reference 
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/e2k3/e2k3/wss_references_webdav.asp). 
On my site (www.infinitec.de), I also have some scripts and free (and 
unfortunately very undocumented) C# library for dealing with the webdav 
issue.

Greetings,
Henning Krause


"Steve Smith"  wrote in message 
news:uIyxVQpUGHA.5108@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>I am updating a number of older VB6 programs that were written using CDO 
>1.21 to perform various tasks against Exchange 5.5 and 2000 mailboxes. I 
>plan to rewrite them in C# with Visual Studio 2005. Exchange 2003 is still 
>a year away for us, so the new applications must use features and 
>interfaces available in Exchange 2000.
>
> Most of these applications run on an application server and use privileged 
> accounts to log on to multiple mailboxes. The applications use the dynamic 
> profile capability of CDO 1.21 (servername & vblf & mailboxX500dn) to 
> allow them to logon to multiple mailboxes without the need for 
> pre-configured MAPI profiles.
>
> Each of these applications need the ability to read messages and their 
> properties, send messages saving to the Sent Items folders, and often 
> access properties of the CDO session object, address entries, folders and 
> messages
>
> Using CDO 1.21 as a COM component in a C# application is probably not a 
> good long-term solution for these applications.
>
> From the reading I've done, it looks like WebDAV is the best fit given my 
> requirements, but I have looked at some samples, and I must say looks very 
> obscure and non-intuitive.
>
> I'd be interested in any feedback from the group on a recommended approach 
> to updating these applications.
>
> Thanks in advance for any feedback.
>
> Steve
>
>
date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 20:44:05 +0200   author:   Henning Krause [MVP]

Google
 
Web ureader.com


    COPYRIGHT 2007, YARDI TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, ALL RIGHT RESERVE  |   contact us