Exchange Server Forums

Viewing the GAL from 2003 mailbox

Users viewing this topic: none

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Microsoft Exchange 2003] >> Migration >> Viewing the GAL from 2003 mailbox

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Limited time MSExchange.org offer! -- 1.Sep.2008 1:00:00 PM

TechGenix and SolarWinds have partnered to provide free copies of SolarWinds Exchange Monitor to all visitors who join the MSExchange.org Forums. SolarWinds Exchange Monitor is a handy desktop dashboard that continuously monitors Microsoft Exchange to deliver real-time insight into Exchange services, mail queue sizes, and host server health. Learn more about Exchange Monitor and the free offer!

Viewing the GAL from 2003 mailbox - 5.Sep.2004 11:59:00 AM

MatterHorn

Posts: 5
Joined: 5.Aug.2004
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

The situation is this:

Currently have a Exchange 5.5 server and have introduced an Exchange 2003 server. The migration seemed to go well, I have replicated the public folders and moved the Internet Mail Connector to the 2003 box and things are running great.

Although I have an issue:

- After moving a mailbox from the 5.5 server onto 2003, after I login to Outlook 2003 I cannot access the GAL. When I create a new mail message and choose the GAL there are no entries, when there should be over 100. The 5.5 server is fine though and it displays all contents of the GAL to users with mailboxes residing on the 5.5 server. Where should I be checking to make sure replication of the GAL is happening or 2003 is setup correctly to read the contents of the 5.5 GAL.

Any help would be most appreciated.

Post #: 1

Featured Links*

RE: Viewing the GAL from 2003 mailbox - 6.Sep.2004 10:37:00 PM

rytmehans

Posts: 803
Joined: 10.Jul.2004
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Hi,

This might help:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;821908

The users needs the showinaddressbook attribute stamped on them in order for OL2003 clients to see them in the GAL

(in reply to MatterHorn)

Post #: 2