<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Shep's Pondering's</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd</link>
	<description>Blog of Guy Shepperd</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:54:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Changing the background on Windows 7 logon screen</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=64</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=64#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:54:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=64</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Windows 7 now supports the ability to have your own graphics as the background for the login screen, without purchasing a third-party application.

Granted it is turned off by default, which means a regedit is required. The place to look is

HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Authentication\LogonUI\Background

And the Dword value to add is

OEMBackground       1 is for [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Windows 7 now supports the ability to have your own graphics as the background for the login screen, without purchasing a third-party application.
</p>
<p>Granted it is turned off by default, which means a regedit is required. The place to look is
</p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt"><strong>HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Authentication\LogonUI\Background<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">And the Dword value to add is<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt"><strong>OEMBackground       </strong>1 is for enabled 0 for disabled.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">Once this has been set you need to create two folders and load some images.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">The place to create the folders is from <strong>%windir%\system32\oobe\<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">The folders to create are<strong> info\backgrounds<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt"><strong>The following files are supported in this folder.<br />
</strong></span></p>
<ul style="margin-left: 53pt">
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">backgroundDefault.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background768&#215;1280.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background900&#215;1440.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background960&#215;1280.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background1024&#215;1280.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background1280&#215;1024.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background1024&#215;768.jpg <br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background1280&#215;960.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background1600&#215;1200.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background1440&#215;900.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background1920&#215;1200.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background1280&#215;768.jpg<br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">background1360&#215;768.jpg <br />
</span></li>
</ul>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt"><em><strong>Note1</strong> – file size has to be 256kb or less<br/><strong>Note2</strong> – the file used will be the resolution of your Primary Monitor. If a resolution specific image is not found it will stretch to fit the backgrounddefault.jpg file.<br />
</em></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">If you&#8217;re not worried about the stretch to fit, and don&#8217;t feel comfortable making the regedit, there is a quick and dirty way to accomplish this, simply replace the backround.bmp file at <strong>%windir%\system32\oobe\.<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">Once the file is present it will automatically load, press CTRL+ALT+Del and you will see your new background.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">Enjoy!<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt">(Credit needs to be given to Rafael and his <a href="http://www.withinwindows.com/2009/03/15/windows-7-to-officially-support-logon-ui-background-customization/">Within Windows Blog</a> &#8212;-Thanks Raf!)<br />
</span></p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt"><br />
		</span> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=64</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>May 2009 Monthly Activity Report</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=62</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=62#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 04:18:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Monthly Reports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=62</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Exchange 2007 Deployment

The majority of the month has been working on project documentation, hardware requirements, and investigating different archiving solutions.

One of the things that I realized needs more documentation in the messaging community is Public Folders. There really is very little guidance on sizing hardware for dedicated Public Folder servers. Here is what Microsoft has [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt"><strong>Exchange 2007 Deployment<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt">The majority of the month has been working on project documentation, hardware requirements, and investigating different archiving solutions.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt">One of the things that I realized needs more documentation in the messaging community is Public Folders. There really is very little guidance on sizing hardware for dedicated Public Folder servers. Here is what Microsoft has written on <a href="http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb124200(EXCHG.65).aspx">Scalability</a>. I know in Exchange 2010 they are being deemphasized even more and Sharepoint is probably a better place for them, but when you have over 8,000 Public folders; I think we might have them for a little while.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt">One of the issues that has been plaguing the deployment has been that after Exchange Rollup-6 was deployed, Entourage clients were unable to see any messages in the inbox. The client would connect, but no messages were displayed. The rollup-6 rollout was a red herring, which coincided with a server rebuild, and mailbox migration.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt">After numerous hours of troubleshooting, a call to Microsoft Premier Support was made. Here is what I learned. (thanks Pawan Kapoor!)<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt">It seems that even though all other clients do their authentication on the Client Access Server, but Entourage authenticates and uses ASP.net. on the Mailstore role This means that you will need to add the ASP.net feature along with the integrated and windows authentication features on each mailstore server you deploy.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt">Here are the two KB articles that the Technician sent to me.<br />
</span></p>
<p><a href="http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc733010.aspx"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt">Configuring Authentication in IIS 7.0:</span></a><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt"><br />
</span></p>
<p><a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931350"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt">You cannot connect to your mailbox on Exchange Server when you use Entourage for Mac:</span></a><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt"><br />
<span style="color:black"><br />
</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt"><strong>Office Communication Server Deployment<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt">The pilot is now in full swing. The adoption rate of this product is astounding.<br />
It is really amazing to see the ease of extemporaneous collaboration that the new R2 release has achieved. Just tonight, I was sitting working on this report, when a colleague asked me to look over a document before he published the final version. I was able to see his desktop inside my Communicator client, make some word change suggestions, point the mouse to where I was referring to, and then being a second set of eyes to verify accuracy, All 131 miles apart. Through on top of that, that we were able to talk over a peer to peer VOIP connection and discuss the changes. This is truly where Unified Communications comes together.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt"><strong><br />
FaxServer Replacement<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt">The hardware named FaxSrv1 was decommissioned, and removed from the data center. The newer hardware formally known as FaxSrv2 was formatted and is currently being reloaded with Windows 2008 Standard on it. There seems to be an issue finding RAID controller drivers, this is where we currently are and looking for alternatives to this dilemma.<br />
</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=62</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>April 2009 Monthly Activity report</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=58</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=58#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:08:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Monthly Reports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=58</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Exchange 2007 Deployment

The exchange 2007 deployment has started out pretty well, we have moved all of ITS over to the new system. There have been very few issues. One of the largest issues has been with the MAC Entourage client. Once we rolled out Rollup 6, the Entourage client is no longer able to see [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family:Arial Unicode MS"><strong>Exchange 2007 Deployment<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Unicode MS">The exchange 2007 deployment has started out pretty well, we have moved all of ITS over to the new system. There have been very few issues. One of the largest issues has been with the MAC Entourage client. Once we rolled out Rollup 6, the Entourage client is no longer able to see the contents or folder structure of the mailbox. This is all Entourage clients, even the new beta one.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Unicode MS">On the positive side, there have been numerous other clients that have been able to attach to the new Exchange 2007 Systems, including two different versions of Thunderbird, and one version of Alpine. These are all using the IMAP settings, but seem to working as expected.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Unicode MS">The next steps are to work through the issues presented by the entourage clients, and then we will continue to retire the VUexchange 2003 systems.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Unicode MS"><strong>Office Communications Server 2007 R2 Deployment<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Unicode MS">This has been the month for OCS, we have been anticipating the Lighthouse engagement, and the rollout of Office Communication Server 2007 R2 since last October. We have built the infrastructure, 5 physical servers, an Enterprise front end, a SQL Backend, a mediation server, and Edge server, and a Unified Messaging server. This will allow us to implement presence, IM, federation, public Internet connections, voice mail, and remote enterprise phones.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Unicode MS">The deployment has been successful; we have normalized our phone numbers to an E164 format, and have the SIP gateway doing the conversion that the PBX is expecting. Learned more about regular expressions while doing this, regular expressions are very robust and powerful once you understand some of the syntax.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Unicode MS">We currently have 175 people provisioned on the Office Communications Server.</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=58</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reducing the media port range on an Office Communications Mediation Server</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=55</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=55#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=55</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By default the number of ports the mediation server will use is 4000 in the range of 60,000 to 64,000.

This is to allow for 1,000 concurrent users. I had an issue opening up this many ports both udp/tcp.

Especially; if we are no where large enough to have 1,000 concurrent users on the system.

So I lowered [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt">By default the number of ports the mediation server will use is 4000 in the range of 60,000 to 64,000.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt">This is to allow for 1,000 concurrent users. I had an issue opening up this many ports both udp/tcp.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt">Especially; if we are no where large enough to have 1,000 concurrent users on the system.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt"><br/>So I lowered ours settings down to 400 ports, range 60,000 to 60,400. This will allow for 100 concurrent calls. I then only have to open up 400 ports, much more acceptable by myself and our security team.<br />
</span></p>
<p>
 </p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt">This option is set in the Graphical User interface, under:<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt">Forest-&gt;mediation Server –FQDN (Mediation Server)<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt">Right Click -&gt; properties (you should see the screen below)<br />
</span></p>
<p>
 </p>
<p><img align="left" src="http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/030309-2035-reducingthe13.jpg" alt=""/><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt"><br />
		</span></p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
 </p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt"><span style="color:black">* As noted in the <a href="http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb964029.aspx"/></span>Media Port Range Server Allocation<span style="color:black"><br />
			</span></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial"><span style="font-size:8pt">For a Mediation Server, the port range must be at least four times the maximum number of concurrent calls that can be supported on the server (two ports for the RTP and RTCP traffic for audio multiplied by two because the Mediation Server is a back-to-back User Agent).</span><span style="font-size:10pt"><br />
			</span></span></p>
<p>
 </p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt">** As noted in the OCS_VOIP_Guide Pg 100<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt">Important<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="color:black; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt">The default range media port range enables the server to handle up to 1000 simultaneous calls. Reducing the port range greatly reduces server capacity and should be undertaken only for specific reasons by an administrator who is knowledgeable about media port requirements, and scenarios. For this reasons, altering the default port range is not generally recommended.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial"><br />
		</span> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=55</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>February Monthly Activity Report (MARS)</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=45</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=45#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:09:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=45</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Exchange 2007 Deployment

This month we have started the Migration over to Exchange 2007. We built the infrastructure, have set the Best practices Options. We first moved over three people, and two resource accounts. This showed us some small issues that needed to be fixed. The first one that showed up was the lag the client [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family:Bookman Old Style; font-size:12pt"><strong><em>Exchange 2007 Deployment<br />
</em></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Bookman Old Style; font-size:12pt">This month we have started the Migration over to Exchange 2007. We built the infrastructure, have set the Best practices Options. We first moved over three people, and two resource accounts. This showed us some small issues that needed to be fixed. The first one that showed up was the lag the client was showing. This wasn&#8217;t a good thing, since we had 5 mailboxes on it, it was specked for 4,000 and it was showing almost an unusable latency. We diagramed the path, and we realized we were making 13 hops for each client, every time it made a connection to the Client Access Servers. We were able to eliminate half the hops by moving the Electronic Messaging AD site behind the same firewall as our load balancers.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Bookman Old Style; font-size:12pt">The second issue that showed up was that the Free Busy for 2003 users wasn&#8217;t being replicated to the 2007 environment. This is still an open issue, and as more people move over to the 2007 environment it will grow exponentially.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Bookman Old Style; font-size:12pt">We moved over 30 People to the 2007 environment, this is to allow us to be able to gauge any further issues. We even moved over to iMac people to help show any issues using Entourage. So far the main complaint has been the free busy. Next steps are to get the mail routing through the Hub Transport servers.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Bookman Old Style; font-size:12pt">We did attempt a DR scenario, we were looking to have the ability to use Database portability, to help recover from a server crash. This was a great opportunity to see where we need to adjust our expectations. We also need to get DR stuff in one location to help facilitate the availability of those items. One of the biggest problems found out was that the media that had been burnt was not usable. It crashed at 99%, and not having a second physical copy or an ISO on my laptop pushed any recovery time out 45 minutes as I download the ISO again.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Bookman Old Style; font-size:12pt"><strong><em>Office Communications Server Pilot<br />
</em></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Bookman Old Style; font-size:12pt">We went into a Production pilot; this is an Office Communications Server R1 installation. Once we moved into this environment, there was a need to move the Mediation Server, the SIP gateway and the Exchange Unified Messaging role. This would enable the pilot users to use Enterprise voice and voicemail. This installation will be scraped in April as we move forward with Office Communications Server R2 engagement with Enabling Technology.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Bookman Old Style; font-size:12pt">With the move of the Electronic Messaging AD Site behind a different firewall gave us e the ability to tighten the firewall rules. Most issues that have been perceived have been a closed port on the firewall that before a catch all rule was enabling.<br />
</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=45</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>OCS 2007 and Unified Communications.</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=44</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=44#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:55:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=44</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dial Plans and Location profiles. These can be the bain of your existence; you try to give them meaningful names so they remind you of what they do. The one thing you need to remember if you are tying enterprise voice to the unified messaging system is that they have to have the same name. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dial Plans and Location profiles. These can be the bain of your existence; you try to give them meaningful names so they remind you of what they do. The one thing you need to remember if you are tying enterprise voice to the unified messaging system is that they have to have the same name. Therefore, it must contain no more than 256 alphanumeric characters and must not contain spaces or special characters other than hyphens (-) or periods (.).
</p>
<p>The other big gotcha in or environment is that we are in a slightly disjoined named space. This made it necessary to modify the ExchUCUtil.psl file. By default it will go to a Global Catalog server in the domain that the universal groups are defined in. This in our environment is not the same domain that the Exchange servers are deployed in.
</p>
<p>To fix this issue I made the change to point the cmdlet to a specific GC by changing these lines.
</p>
<ul>
<li>
<div style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt"> $globalCatalog = $entry.psbase.Properties["rootDomainNamingContext"].Value;<br/> $entry.psbase.Path = &#8220;GC://&#8221; + $globalCatalog<br/> write-host Using Global Catalog: $entry.psbase.Path<br />
</span></div>
<p style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt"> Put a # at the beginning of the second line and add a new line to point directly to a GC that exists on your domain1.com.<br />
</span></p>
<p style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt"> For example:<br />
</span></p>
<p style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt"> $globalCatalog = $entry.psbase.Properties["rootDomainNamingContext"].Value;<br/> # $entry.psbase.Path = &#8220;GC://&#8221; + $globalCatalog<br />
</span></p>
<p style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt"> $entry.psbase.Path = &#8220;GC://myServer01.domain1.com&#8221;<br />
</span></p>
<p style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt"> write-host Using Global Catalog: $entry.psbase.Path<br />
</span></p>
<p style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt"> This assumes you have a GC called myServer01.domain1.com. Save the file, and run Get-UCPool.ps1<br />
</span></p>
<p style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt">Once this was changed the command ran appropriately. Creating the appropriate Access lists needed to connect the servers.<br />
</span></p>
<p style="background: white"><span style="font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt"><span style="color:#080808">(found this at <a href="http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/exchangesvrunifiedmessaging/thread/0a39c851-9039-45eb-92fd-7718e0485405/"/></span>Technet forums<span style="color:#080808"> thanks <a href="http://social.technet.microsoft.com/en-US/profile/?user=Ray%20Fong%20-%20MSFT&amp;referrer=http%3A//social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/exchangesvrunifiedmessaging/thread/0a39c851-9039-45eb-92fd-7718e0485405/"/></span>Ray Fong<span style="color:#080808"> for this answer.)<br />
</span></span></p>
<p style="background: white">
 </p>
<p style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt">After creating aN Auto attendant to answer the calls, we now have unified Messaging answering Voicemail through Office Communications Server.<br />
</span></p>
<p style="background: white; margin-left: 291pt">
 </p>
<p style="background: white"><span style="color:#080808; font-family:Verdana; font-size:9pt"><br />
				</span> </p>
</li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=44</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>January 2009 monthly Activity report</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=43</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=43#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:10:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Monthly Reports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=43</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[January has been one of the most productive months in a long while. Some of the projects I am on are starting to move forward. Which meeting and discussing are nice, but actually getting down to the technical work is a whole lot more fun!

Exchange 2007 Deployment

One of the first things we had to work [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">January has been one of the most productive months in a long while. Some of the projects I am on are starting to move forward. Which meeting and discussing are nice, but actually getting down to the technical work is a whole lot more fun!<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt;"><strong>Exchange 2007 Deployment<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">One of the first things we had to work on this month was the ramifications of adding a GC into our existing Campus AD Site. When we added the GC that was required for the prepdomain in the 2007 pre-deployment process, we didn&#8217;t realize that Exchange 2003 would pick it up in the DSaccess tab, and use it to expand groups. Since the GC is not in the same domain as the exchange servers, when it expanded the groups, it sent back errors. These errors were particularly felt when it was a security permission set on the groups.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The solution was to take the DSAccess off of automatic and manually set the GC&#8217;s that it would use for group expansion.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">After that configuration was implemented and settled down, we installed three Hub transport servers into the new Exchange 2007 Administrative group. We then left the servers in place, and monitored mail flow, once we were certain that mail still flowed appropriately we then went ahead and introduced the Client Access servers (CAS) and the Mailbox servers.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">We are now working on the configuration of the host based firewalls, and the load balancer configurations. After that our Pilot group of users will be ready to help iron out any irregularities&#8217; that may have been introduced.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">One of the lessons learned when deploying a new routing group connector was that each server in the legacy exchange organization that will be sending mail across the connector must be in the universal group Excahngelegacy interop group. This will grant them permission to send mail across the connector.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt;"><strong>Octel replacement<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">We are currently looking at the bids again to further determine whos product would be the best fit for Vanderbilt.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt;"><strong>Fax server deployment<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">This project is currently not being activity worked on. It is awaiting confirmation of the Unified Communications Project.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt;"><strong>Unified communications project (lighthouse)<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">We have been accepted into Microsoft&#8217;s Lighthouse program for their unified communication product. We are currently waiting for the R2 release of Office Communications Server, and new hardware arrival. This project is dependent on the Exchange 2007 deployment project.<br />
</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=43</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>November Monthly Activity Report (mars)</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=42</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=42#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 02:58:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Monthly Reports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=42</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AD Meetings
These meetings are still being productive. We have come up with different scenarios with the Exchange 2007 Schema Changes, and even found dependencies that we might not have seen other wise.
The big dependency is that there has to be a GC in the root domain, even if their will never be email accounts in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h1 style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><em><span style="font-size: small; font-family: Arial;">AD Meetings</span></em></h1>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">These meetings are still being productive. We have come up with different scenarios with the Exchange 2007 Schema Changes, and even found dependencies that we might not have seen other wise.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The big dependency is that there has to be a GC in the root domain, even if their will never be email accounts in it. This is largely due to the Universal security groups that Exchange 2007 is based upon.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"> </span></span></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><strong><em><span style="font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><span style="font-size: small;">Octel Replacement</span></span></em></strong></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';">No change this month; most meetings were canceled due to members not being present.</span></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;"><strong><em>Fax server Project</em></strong></span></span></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';">This project has been put on hold. I have turned of the Faxsrv1 equipment and have started to reclaim the FaxSrv2 equipment. We will be building this out with the Windows 2008 standard server operating system.</span></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><strong><em><span style="font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></em></strong></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><em><strong><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 7.5pt;"><span style="font-size: small;">Unified Communications Pilot</span></span></strong></em></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><em><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: black; font-style: normal; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 7.5pt;">We have started using the DID lines for communications with the outside world. Some team members have seen the usefulness of having the communicator tied into the phone system. It allows them to have the head set on, that way their hands are free to troubleshoot with tech support. </span></em></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><em><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: black; font-style: normal; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 7.5pt;">The other big news is that partner support has started using the Communicator software. This has allowed partner support to be able to familiarize themselves with the product and the idiosynchrocies that come along with it. When we go live in Feburary with the full product offering they will be ready to support any issue.</span></em><em><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: black; font-family: Verdana; mso-bidi-font-size: 7.5pt;"></span></em></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Verdana; mso-bidi-font-size: 7.5pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><em><strong><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 7.5pt;"><span style="font-size: small;">Exchange 2007 design\implementation</span></span></strong></em></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><em><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: black; font-style: normal; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 7.5pt;">There has been a lot of movement on the project. All the hardware has been built and ready to deploy. A total of 4 virtual machines have been built and prepped for installation. </span></em></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><em><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: black; font-style: normal; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 7.5pt;">We have procured a subnet, and created a new AD Site, and have it behind a firewall. The AD team has deployed the DC’s dedicated for this site. We are working with the security team to get the proper firewall rules in place.</span></em></p>
<p><em><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: black; font-style: normal; font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 7.5pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">The delay in this project is the schema changes and the dependency of having a GC in the root site. The decision to build a new DC and have it in the new AD site has been made to help reduce the amount of replication traffic and latency times.</span></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=42</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>October 2008 Monthly Activity Report</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=41</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=41#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 22:30:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Monthly Reports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=41</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Another fine month in IT, seems the projects are slowing down a little. Well, at least the forward momentum has slowed some. Given last month&#8217;s drive to get Unified Collaboration into Vanderbilt, we know that we need to move forward, but we are taking a step back and making sure we have the proper infrastructure [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Another fine month in IT, seems the projects are slowing down a little. Well, at least the forward momentum has slowed some. Given last month&#8217;s drive to get Unified Collaboration into Vanderbilt, we know that we need to move forward, but we are taking a step back and making sure we have the proper infrastructure in place. The test environment has pretty much fleshed out what will be needed and the enormity of the undertaking, but we are up for it.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;"><strong><em>AD\Exchange 2007 meetings<br />
</em></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">This meeting has been a standing Friday meeting to help coordinate the introduction of Exchange 2007 into the current exchange organization. The mantra we are saying is &#8220;Do no harm&#8221;. We have created a plan to test the routing in our test environment, to ensure that we are not missing any last minute details that might cause &#8220;harm&#8221;. We already had our systems in the test environment so a lot of our time has been hurry up and wait. The other thing slowing this down is the availability of the medical center CMS staff, there is a lot of issues in the production environment so the test one takes a back seat.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;"><strong><em>Octel replacement<br />
</em></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">The never ending project, I keep thinking each month I will be able to say we have some to a decision, and it looks like the team has came to the another decision, and now we are working with the vendors to ensure that we have a solid Hybrid system. Now the last part of this is to finish the recommendation, and present it to upper manangement.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;"><strong><em>FaxSrv replacement<br />
</em></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size:10pt">This project has been put on hold. The server that this is on, has started have a hard drive failure. It is out of warranty, and there is not any momentum on getting a fax server in place to send fax, because the unified Collaboration project is overlapping it. </span><span style="font-size:12pt"><strong><em><br />
</em></strong></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;"><strong><em>Unified Communications Pilot<br />
</em></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">I have spent the most time this month on this project; it has been a lot of fact checking and configuration checking. I have also spent time on trying to get the test OCS server federated with the Production OCS server. The edge configuration has been interesting. I am seeing it trying to go out, but it is never arriving. Not sure where to go now. Validation works with a couple warnings, I have set the host file to have the hostnames for the external nics, so name resolution shouldn&#8217;t be the issue, but I am not 1005 certain that isn&#8217;t the problem.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;"><strong><em>Exchange 2007 design\implementation<br />
</em></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">The test exchange 2007 systems are working pretty well; here are still some minor details we are still working on. One being that the contacts doesn&#8217;t show up in IMAP sessions with Entourage. Have to give Kudos to Dan and Tony for figuring out what the issue was, it seems when I created the mail enabled contacts I didn&#8217;t mark one of the mail attributes.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">The other outstanding issue is that of free/busy right now if you log into OWA you can see the free\busy but the Outlook client still isn&#8217;t showing it for 2003 users.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"><br />
</span> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=41</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>September Monthly Activity Report</title>
		<link>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=40</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=40#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 14:38:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>guy.shepperd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?p=40</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unified Communications

The Unified Communications project has started to take off. We were commissioned to get 1000 Users on a Production pilot by January 2009. This will take a lot of coordination, and focused effort, but is an obtainable goal. We have set up a weekly meeting with the Medical Center to work through AD and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family:Arial Black; font-size:12pt"><strong>Unified Communications<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt"><strong>The Unified Communications project has started to take off. We were commissioned to get 1000 Users on a Production pilot by January 2009. This will take a lot of coordination, and focused effort, but is an obtainable goal. We have set up a weekly meeting with the Medical Center to work through AD and Exchange issues. This is due to the joint and AD environment. We agreed to have the test environment ready to go by the Middle of October, with the production AD ready by the first week of November. Over all, the concerns were mainly about training and co-existence; both of these issues have been addressed.<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt"><strong>We met with the UC representative from Microsoft to apply for the Lighthouse program. We looked over our current infrastructure and found that we are not as far off as we thought we would be. One thing that was brought out of the meeting was the redundancy of the mediations server. The Microsoft representative is to supply the answer for that design question.<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Black; font-size:12pt"><strong>Exchange Training<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt"><strong>Brought a trainer onsite to help transfer skill sets from exchange 2003 to exchange 2007, the first three days was based on labs, and lecture. There were small tid bits that were brought out of what would have to happen in a co-existence phase and user migrations. Mainly that the user object would have to be migrated from a legacy user to a full 2007 user, this will have to be also done for resource rooms to make them true resource account for Exchange 2007.<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Black; font-size:12pt"><strong>Octel Replacement<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt"><strong>This project has been through many different evaluations. The newest avenue is a co-existence between two voicemail systems, the new system to help do ECP&#8217;s and a Unified messaging system to do voice mail. The biggest issue is that Microsoft has made their system hard to co-exist with. So the way to transfer messages between the systems will be via smtp. This is an acceptable solutions so now we are revisiting the solution for a Hybrid.<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial Black; font-size:12pt"><strong>Fax Server replacement<br />
</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt"><strong>This project has been on the back burner for a while, I have started the build of a new OS on Fax Server2. This needed to be done to get a New Right Fax installed, and to help clean the OS up from the numerous test projects it has been on. Also the IP was needed to be changed to the .7 network and not the .115.<br />
</strong></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.vanderbilt.edu/~guy.shepperd/?feed=rss2&amp;p=40</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
