barcode generator c# code project Test-MailFlow AutoDiscoverTargetMailboxServer in Visual C#.NET

Generation Denso QR Bar Code in Visual C#.NET Test-MailFlow AutoDiscoverTargetMailboxServer

If you re having problems with a specific server, you can identify it as the target:

Test-Mailflow TargetMailboxServer 'ExServer1'

It s possible to be even more specific and test that mail submission and delivery are functioning correctly for a mailbox database:

Test-MailFlow TargetDatabase 'VIP Mailboxes'

All of the commands explored to date cause messages to flow to and from the system mailboxes located in the databases that are involved in the tests. You can also test mail delivery to a remote email address by providing Exchange with an SMTP address, to which it can send a test message similar to the one illustrated in Figure 3-16.

Test-MailFlow TargetEmailAddress 'Tony.Redmond@contoso.com'

3

Note that Exchange might report tests to remote email domains as failures. This occurs when it cannot confirm the successful delivery of the message because of the length of time that the remote email server takes to respond to the delivery receipt request. It s also possible that the remote email system will suppress delivery service messages. On the other hand, if you use a local SMTP address as the target mailbox, you ll invariability receive a success status because all of the processing occurs within the same Exchange organization. If your test fails within an Exchange organization, it s evidence that something pretty serious is going on within the transport system. You can adjust the latency setting that governs the threshold to regard a test as a success or failure with the ErrorLatency parameter. The default setting is 15 seconds for local test and 180 seconds for a remote test. The ExecutionTimeOut parameter is also involved, as it sets a limit for the total amount of time that a test can run before it exits. The default is 240 seconds, so it s also possible that a remote email server might not respond before the total test time expires.

3

EMS is a great way to get work done with Exchange as long as you don t mind grappling with the command-line interface. If no control were exerted, you could do massive damage to an Exchange organization with EMS, such as selecting all the mailboxes in a database and removing them with a single line of code. Of course, only the people who need to control the full scope of the organization should be able to take such drastic action. Traditionally, control is given through permissions and privileges. Exchange 2010 takes a different approach and adopts the RBAC model. All administrators need a solid grounding in RBAC and its implementation in Exchange, so that s where our journey leads us next.

RBAC basics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Scopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Role groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 Role assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160

Assignment policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 RBAC enhancements in SP1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 Exchange Control Panel and roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 Figuring out RBAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 On to management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180

the introduction of the Database Availability Group (DAG) is the most technologically interesting advance in Microsoft Exchange Server 2010, the implementation of a new permissions model based on the concept of role-based access control (RBAC) exerts the most pervasive influence across all parts of the product. RBAC is therefore the most important element for administrators to master.