Rules not working selecting by account

[Roger Davis]

After upgrading office staff from Outlook 2000 (SR1) being the most reliable
version ever issued I find that rules along the lines of "Move email which
comes via this account" are no longer reliable.

Situation is SBS2000 with Exchange 2000 - all SBS Service Packs fitted.

Using Outlook 2000 these rules never missed a beat - always sorted emails
for user B account into user B folder.

Outlook XP (2002) often [say 30% of the time] will fail to move user B
emails according to the rule - these all end up in the User A Inbox and so
far I can not see any correlation between other events such as always
happens when there are simultaneously [in the same 5 minute period] email
for both - though I suspect that might be the case.

Outlook 2003 does the same as above but does another action far worse:-
Primary user C has "Leave email on server for 5 days" but secondary user D
does not. Whenever they are emails coming in for user D, Outlook appears to
fetch all the User C emails using the same rules as D - and does NOT leave
"C" emails on server. As a result when C returns to his primary office
some emails will never be delivered - they were "NOT left on server by the
remote system.




Has anyone found a solution to this problem ?

Is it likely to work better better using Exchange 2003 ?


Client A [The Office Manager] has demanded I uninstall Office XP and put
back the Office 2000 SR1 - she says she would rather go without the ability
to accept meeting bookings from others already using Outlook 2003.


Frustrated Office Upgrader

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

After upgrading office staff from Outlook 2000 (SR1) being the most
reliable version ever issued I find that rules along the lines of
"Move email which comes via this account" are no longer reliable.

Don't mix Internet Mail and Exchange in the same profile. It isn't even
supported in OL2000 and earlier, and in later versions is not a very
efficient way to handle your mail.

Situation is SBS2000 with Exchange 2000 - all SBS Service Packs
fitted.

Using Outlook 2000 these rules never missed a beat - always sorted
emails for user B account into user B folder.

Rules are not the best way to accomplish what you want, if I understand your
setup/desired config correctly... why can't user B's mailbox handle its own
mail?

Outlook XP (2002) often [say 30% of the time] will fail to move user B
emails according to the rule - these all end up in the User A Inbox
and so far I can not see any correlation between other events such as
always happens when there are simultaneously [in the same 5 minute
period] email for both - though I suspect that might be the case.

Outlook 2003 does the same as above but does another action far
worse:- Primary user C has "Leave email on server for 5 days" but
secondary user D does not. Whenever they are emails coming in for
user D, Outlook appears to fetch all the User C emails using the same
rules as D - and does NOT leave "C" emails on server. As a result
when C returns to his primary office some emails will never be
delivered - they were "NOT left on server by the remote system.

Why are you using POP in your mail profiles when you have an Exchange
server? Don't. Your mail profile should contain Exchange - no POP, no
PST/IMAP accounts. All Internet mail should be handled by your Exchange
server. All mail should be stored in the Exchange mailboxes. Mail should
ideally be delivered automatically to the addresses/mailboxes on the server
side, not the client. Y

In Exchange System Manager, you can grant UserA the right to open/manage
UserB's mailbox in Outlook along with his/her own mailbox - and even "send
as" rights to UserB's mailbox.

See http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/MF002.html for help on hosting your
own mail, but I suggest you post in microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000
for more help as SBS is heavily wizard-centric.

Has anyone found a solution to this problem ?

I'm not sure what your exact configuration is. You have individual mailboxes
for user A, B, C, D, right?
Do you have a registered domain name?

Is it likely to work better better using Exchange 2003 ?

Exchange isn't the issue here at all.

Client A [The Office Manager] has demanded I uninstall Office XP and
put back the Office 2000 SR1 - she says she would rather go without
the ability to accept meeting bookings from others already using
Outlook 2003.

Well, OL2000 is old and unsupported. Also, as I said, your problems are
complicated (and likely caused) by your current configuration, which you can
fairly easily simplify so all is working as it's supposed to.

Hope this helps - post back if you have questions/corrections.