Address Rewrite

[gb0mb]

I currently have users with 2 different mailboxes per user.

abc.local
and
abc.com

The .local is the default mailbox of all users due to the domain of @abc.local

I use the @abc.com as the reply address for all users outbound mail.

The problem I have is that I also have a few internal Thunderbird users. I have set them up to Imap to the exchange server using TLS and authentication. In Thunderbird it only seems to work as long as the email account name they use is user@abc.local.

If I use user@abc.com I get user doesn't have permission to send mail. I am assuming this is due to the user credentials being part of abc.local.

I have come across the rewrite feature of exchange and am looking for a way to have all outward bound mail from abc.local be rewritten to abc.com. This is not a problem for people using outlook. This is just for Thunderbird users.

Am I on the right track looking into rewriting?

Thanks.

Gb0mb

........99.9% User Error........

 

[ShackDaddy]

I don't understand why you have given each user two mailboxes instead of giving each mailbox two SMTP addresses... That would be the normal way of handling your environment, and it would bypass your issues...

Using the default recipient policy, you should be easily able to assign the mailboxes any number of valid or internal email addresses without disrupting authentication.

Let me know if I misunderstood you.

Dave Shackelford
MCSE, CCNA, Microsoft MVP: Exchange
Shackelford Consulting

 

[Zelandakh]

Heck, you could leave it all alone and change the domain on the SMTP connector - even faster that using the equivalent of the RUS.

 

[gb0mb]

ShackDaddy,

Sorry it came out wrong, I gave each user 2 SMTP addresses only one mailbox.

It seems that Exchange is just authenticating the user to be able to relay through the server, yet not checking the default reply address for that user.

Zelandakh,

I am not sure what RUS is.

Thanks for both your help.



Gb0mb

........99.9% User Error........

 

[ShackDaddy]

This is one of the dozen reasons why I like to make the internal and external domain names the same...

So there's really no way to separate out the authentication address and the reply address in Thunderbird? Even Outlook Express allows differentiation.

I'd wonder if it wouldn't be easier to ask internal users to use something besides Thunderbird than to mess with a re-write.

Dave Shackelford
MCSE, CCNA, Microsoft MVP: Exchange
Shackelford Consulting

 

[ShackDaddy]

If this page gives an accurate walkthrough:

http://products.secureserver.net/email/email_thunderbird.htm

then it seems like you could INITIALLY use the real external address when you start the wizard, but after that use the internal address, when it's more about authentication... But maybe not. I'm sure you've messed with it quite a bit.

Dave Shackelford
MCSE, CCNA, Microsoft MVP: Exchange
Shackelford Consulting

 

[Zelandakh]

Why *are* you using Thunderbird as an email client anyway?

 

[gb0mb]

Thank you for the link I will read up on it.

The reasons for Thunderbird:

The network supports allot of developers who call prefer to build on a Linux/BSD system.

Thunderbird is free. so when a user wishes to use open office and Thunderbird I don't mind the extra money in my hardware budget. I think a volume lic. MS Office is around $350 (With Outlook) times that by about 30 of my users not running any MS product and I have an extra 10k for other needed areas.

The Thunderbird issue is annoying, but I don't like to let little things go. I prefer a complete solution.



Gb0mb

........99.9% User Error........

 

[Zelandakh]

Exchange 2003 licence used to come with a copy of Outlook 2003.
Shame they changed the rules this time.

I trust you've got Exchange Standard CALs for each of the users though.

 

[gb0mb]

So when you bought a license for 2003 a copy of outlook 2k3 was included. Are you sure this is not true for 2k7?

I am not used to dealing with Microsoft Licensing and am trying to verify that I am running a fully legally licensed network.

I am now going to verify my CALS as you stated.

For a little clarity on CALS, if I have 10 computers connecting to an Exchange server but never more than 5 at any one time am I required to have 10 or 5 cals? Knowing Microsoft I am sure you need 10.

Thanks again.



Gb0mb

........99.9% User Error........

 

[GrimR]

here's a little background information

You would buy a Device CAL when you have more users than devices. This will allow multiple users to use the same device (not at the same time though -multiplexing not allowed) Example, you have 10 shift workers and 5 pc's. You would buy 5 device CALs and all 10 workers may use those pc's.



As for a user CAL, the rule is to purchase these CALs when you have more devices than users for example, one user may work on 3 different pc's. You would then buy 1 user CAL allowing the user to work on any pc.

 

[Zelandakh]

If you have A computers, B users and C concurrent users, here is the deal.

Ignore C.
More users than computers? Buy device CALs.
More computers than users? Buy client CALs.

But disable the licensing service anyway to stop the unpleasant spamming of the event log.