[ExchangeList] Re: Does 2003 require X400 addresses?

  • From: "Michael B. Smith" <swngdnz@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:57:57 -0500

Well, I can't answer that with 100% authority.

 

If you are in an Exchange 2000+ native mode environment, without X400
connectors - I don't think that they will. I've never tested that, your
mileage may vary, etc. etc.

 

  _____  

From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of William Holmes
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 10:54 AM
To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Does 2003 require X400 addresses?

 

Here's a question related to this:

 

Do contact objects or user objects with external email addresses really need
an X400 address?   It sounds (by your explanation of how X400 addresses are
used) that objects that don't have mailboxes don't really need the x400
address.

 

Thanks

 

Bill

 

  _____  

From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael B. Smith
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 10:36 AM
To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Does 2003 require X400 addresses?

 

If you delete them, you'll regret it.

 

Exchange uses them for several things, perhaps most importantly to map a
user account to the mailbox object in the mailstore.

 

I think it would be true to say that Exchange no longer uses those addresses
for message routing.

 

  _____  

From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Arnold, Jamie
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 10:16 AM
To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ExchangeList] Does 2003 require X400 addresses?

 

I can't find anything that says this definitively, but it was my
understanding that Exchange 2003 and higher no longer uses X400 addressing
within the org and that SMTP addresses are all it requires to function.
True?

Thanks

Other related posts: