[ExchangeList] Re: Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question
- From: Matt Nelson <nelsonm@xxxxxxxx>
- To: "exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 10:53:27 -0700
|
Yeah, we’re using Datacove due to the ease of search
capability aside from legal compliance. It makes it really easy to find
documents that the users have emailed to eachother. In the scenario below
you cannot prove that you did a diligent search or that the emails were not
deleted. Archiving solutions for legal compliance should be able to prove
that you did a proper search and that no emails have been deleted (at least not
deleted from the archive). From:
exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Adam Archer Here is our situation. Our
Compliance/Legal Departments are in the process of redefining record retention.
In regards to email here is what they are proposing. Setup 4 mail stores. One
for basic users, one for more advanced users, one for executives, and then one
for legal holds. The idea is that whenever there is a legal hold, move the
mailboxes to the legal hold mail store. Each mail store has different email limits.The
legal hold mail store has no limits. Is this a good practice (moving mailboxes
to different stores often)? Would there be any risks that we would run moving
mailboxes around like this? |
- Follow-Ups:
- [ExchangeList] Re: Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question
- From: Adam Archer
- [ExchangeList] Re: Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question
- References:
- [ExchangeList] Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question
- From: Adam Archer
- [ExchangeList] Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question
Other related posts:
- » [ExchangeList] Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question - Adam Archer
- » [ExchangeList] Re: Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question - Matt Nelson
- » [ExchangeList] Re: Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question - Adam Archer
- » [ExchangeList] Re: Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question - Brian Pituley
- » [ExchangeList] Re: Exchange 2003 Mail Store Question - Rick Boza