Search Results

Search found 6 results on 1 pages for 'nariman'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • SharePoint, Exchange and Incoming Emails Without Directory Management Services

    - by Nariman
    Trying to keep this as simple as possible. We've already created the email accounts that we need (e.g. account[1-20]@domain.com) on Exchange/AD. We'd like to now enable incoming emails on SharePoint 2007 lists corresponding to these accounts. My thinking is we don’t need to configure Directory Management Services [2] – the architecture will be simpler without it and the application doesn’t require these services. However, we still need to route messages from Exchange to either local SMTP services (via the connector described in the articles below) or by user-specific drop-folder settings (if permitted by Exchange). So the question is: can we instruct Exchange to use a drop folder just for accounts account[1-20]@domain.com? or do we need to change the accounts to account[1-20]@sharepointsmtp.domain.com and re-route those message to the local SMTP service that will drop them on disk? I've read the material below. [1] - http://www.combined-knowledge.com/Downloads/2007/How%20to%20configure%20Email%20Enabled%20Lists%20in%20Moss2007%20RTM%20using%20Exchange%202007.pdf http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en/sharepointdevelopment/thread/91e0c3d2-afe6-469d-b1bc-6ae7a9aa287e http://gj80blogtech.blogspot.com/2009/12/configure-incoming-email-setting-in.html http://www.jasonslater.co.uk/2007/08/10/configuring-incoming-mail-on-moss-2007-and-exchange-2007/ http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc262947%28office.12%29.aspx http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc263260%28office.12%29.aspx [2] – http://graycloud.com/sharepoint/incoming-mail-configuration-what-permissions-are-require-t39483.html

    Read the article

  • CompilationMode=Never & SessionState

    - by Nariman
    It seems that CompilationMode=Never doesn't permit Sessions to be properly wired. It first complains that the EnbaleSessionState directive is not allowed on this page. Explicitly assigning the System.Web.SessionState.IRequiresSessionState to the Page [1] avoids the null reference exceptions (around .Session access) but still doesn't persist or wire-up sessions correctly. Has anyone successfully used ASP.NET Sessions with CompilationMode=Never? Conceptually, why should these be disjoint?? [1] - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.ui.compilationmode.aspx

    Read the article

  • String Functions in IIS Url Rewritting Module

    - by Nariman
    The IIS URL Rewrite Module ships with 3 built-in functions: * ToLower - returns the input string converted to lower case. * UrlEncode - returns the input string converted to URL-encoded format. This function can be used if the substitution URL in rewrite rule contains special characters (for example non-ASCII or URI-unsafe characters). * UrlDecode - decodes the URL-encoded input string. This function can be used to decode a condition input before matching it against a pattern. The functions can be invoked by using the following syntax: {function_name:any_string} The question is: can this list be extended by introducing a Replace function that's available for changing values within a rewrite rule action or condition?

    Read the article

  • String Functions in IIS Url Rewrite Module

    - by Nariman
    The IIS URL Rewrite Module ships with 3 built-in functions: * ToLower - returns the input string converted to lower case. * UrlEncode - returns the input string converted to URL-encoded format. This function can be used if the substitution URL in rewrite rule contains special characters (for example non-ASCII or URI-unsafe characters). * UrlDecode - decodes the URL-encoded input string. This function can be used to decode a condition input before matching it against a pattern. The functions can be invoked by using the following syntax: {function_name:any_string} The question is: can this list be extended by introducing a Replace function that's available for changing values within a rewrite rule action or condition? Another way to frame the question: is there any way to do a global replace on a URL coming in using this module? It seems that you're limited to using regular expressions and back-references to construct strings, without a search/replace functionality to replace every X with Y in {REQUEST_URI} before issuing a redirect.

    Read the article

  • Why is GXHC_gx_session_id appended to URLs?

    - by Nariman
    Based on my limited understanding of this parameter [1] it seems to be used in representing cookieless session IDs in java applications... but strangely, we're now noticing that a 3-year-old .NET stack is now appearing in Bing SERPs with GXHC_gx_session_id appended to the domain - and we're not alone: http://www.bing.com/search?q=GXHC_gx_session_id http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&q=GXHC_gx_session_id When comparing Google SERPs to Bing SERPs there are some inconsistencies in whether a particular site carries this parameter - is it then a bing-specific issue only? What else could cause this parameter to be appended to indexed URLs if the target environment (anything behind the load balancers) isn't running java? [1] - http://java.itags.org/java-web-tier-apis/72018/

    Read the article

1