Exchange Server Forums
Forums |
Register |
Login |
My Profile |
Inbox |
RSS 
|
My Subscription |
My Forums |
Address Book |
Member List |
Search |
FAQ |
Ticket List |
Log Out
catch-all for multiple domains. an easier way?
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
Login  | |
|
 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!
|
catch-all for multiple domains. an easier way? - 2.Dec.2008 4:52:41 AM
|
|
|
meulie
Posts: 6
Joined: 2.Dec.2008
From: Evert
Status: offline
|
Hi all,
I need to set up catchall for the various domains we handle on our Exchange 2003 server. I have seen the Microsoft KB article, but there has to be an easier way to do this, right...? (...said the Linux postmaster...)
Besides, the way I interpret that KB is that it catches ALL email, not just the email for which no mailbox is present on the Exchange server...
_____________________________
Regards,
Evert
|
|
|
|
RE: catch-all for multiple domains. an easier way? - 2.Dec.2008 3:06:31 PM
|
|
|
uemurad
Posts: 5571
Joined: 7.Jan.2004
From: California, USA
Status: online
|
You want a catch-all, but only for live addresses. It sounds more like you want to enable Mailbox Store archiving (a.k.a. journaling).
_____________________________
Regards,
Dean T. Uemura
Microsoft MVP - Exchange
exchangeguy.blogspot.com
uemurad@yahoo.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: catch-all for multiple domains. an easier way? - 4.Dec.2008 3:09:40 AM
|
|
|
meulie
Posts: 6
Joined: 2.Dec.2008
From: Evert
Status: offline
|
Perhaps I was not quite clear. I want a catch-all, but it should only catch emails sent to non-existent addresses in our domains. Any emails to live addresses (active mailboxes) should be delivered normally.
We need something like this to catch emails sent to typo's like custtomerservice@[domain] and to catch emails sent to ppl who no longer work here (and whose emailboxes have been removed)
_____________________________
Regards,
Evert
|
|
|
|
|
RE: catch-all for multiple domains. an easier way? - 5.Dec.2008 3:54:03 AM
|
|
|
meulie
Posts: 6
Joined: 2.Dec.2008
From: Evert
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: uemurad
You're right - I misunderstood. I think this is what you are looking for:
HOW TO: Forward Mail with Unresolved Recipients to a Single Mailbox
That looks promising! Will it work without any problems on Exchange 2003?
_____________________________
Regards,
Evert
|
|
|
|
|
RE: catch-all for multiple domains. an easier way? - 5.Dec.2008 4:56:58 AM
|
|
|
NileshS
Posts: 67
Joined: 27.Apr.2008
Status: offline
|
Yes, this will be applicable for E2K3 too.
When a message arrives, Exchange Server 2003 tries to find the destination address in the Active Directory database. If Exchange Server cannot find the destination address in Active Directory and Exchange Server is not the authoritative, Exchange checks the Exchange connectors and the local DNS for a match and delivers the mail when it finds a corresponding address space.
When Exchange Server 2003 tries to deliver a message to a local address space (an address space that exists on a recipient policy), it tries to find the destination address in the Microsoft Active Directory directory service. If Exchange cannot find the destination address in Active Directory, the following occurs:
- If the Exchange organization is not authoritative, Exchange Server checks connectors and DNS to find another route to that address space. If Exchange finds a matching connector address space, the Message will be routed to that Connector
- If Exchange finds no Connector, it routes the e-mail through DNS and looks for a corresponding MX record and routes the e-mail to this host.
- If Exchange doesn’t find any match, a non-delivery report (NDR) is generated with error code 5.4.0. This error code indicates that there is a name resolution issue.
- If the Exchange organization is authoritative for the e-mail domain, Exchange Server immediately generates an NDR with error code 5.1.1. This error code indicates that the destination address does not exist.
You can modify this behaviour if you specify another host which is responsible for further e-mail delivery and the generation of NDR (Non Delivery Reports). You can enter the IP Address or FQDN (Fully Qualified Domain Name) of the Host that you want to forward all unresolved messages to authoritative domains. When you type the FQDN or the IP address, enclose it in square brackets ([ ]).
Please note: An NDR is not generated if messages are forwarded to this host. The Host that you specify in the Dialog box is responsible for NDR generation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: catch-all for multiple domains. an easier way? - 5.Dec.2008 6:46:03 AM
|
|
|
meulie
Posts: 6
Joined: 2.Dec.2008
From: Evert
Status: offline
|
I found this page (under Method 2). Saves me some work! :-)
_____________________________
Regards,
Evert
|
|
|
|
|
RE: catch-all for multiple domains. an easier way? - 8.Dec.2008 2:22:54 AM
|
|
|
meulie
Posts: 6
Joined: 2.Dec.2008
From: Evert
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: uemurad
You're right - I misunderstood. I think this is what you are looking for:
HOW TO: Forward Mail with Unresolved Recipients to a Single Mailbox
I'm giving it a try, but it does not seem to work. Could it be because we have a smart host defined on our 'original' smtp server? Does that interfere with this program?
_____________________________
Regards,
Evert
|
|
|
|
|
RE: catch-all for multiple domains. an easier way? - 8.Dec.2008 5:49:48 PM
|
|
|
Sembee
Posts: 3960
Joined: 17.Jan.2008
From: Somewhere near London, UK
Status: offline
|
You really do not want to use a catch all on any server. Leave that technique where it belongs - in the 1990s.
It basically means that every address is valid on your server. That means every spam, virus infected message will come in. Instead you should use recipient filtering so that the email messages to non-existent users are dropped at the point of delivery.
I have a site that drops 10,000 messages A DAY to non-existent users. The amount of bandwidth that would be used if recipient filtering was not used.
It is also better for both the sender and the recipient company - as it means every knows the message has not been delivered, rather than disappear in to a black hole.
Simon.
_____________________________
Simon Butler,
Exchange MVP
Blog: http://www.sembee.co.uk/
Web: http://www.amset.info/
In the UK? Hire me: http://www.amset.co.uk/
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
Printable Version
