[gptalk] Re: Problem with GPO Setting even after set to 'Not Configured'

  • From: "Darren Mar-Elia" <darren@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:29:04 -0800

Looking at the doc, it sounds like this setting is stuck in the user's
profile, as Alan had suggested. How are your new user's profiles created? My
guess is that they are created from a template Default User Profile that has
that path stuck in it.

 

Darren

 

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of TAZAMAL HUSSAIN
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 5:00 PM
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: Problem with GPO Setting even after set to 'Not
Configured'

 

Alan, Darren, Jamie....
 
Your responses and guidance has been very much appreciated. I've done some
screen scrapes to try and eliminate any things you guys may think i might be
doing wrong... I hope these help us find a solution. 
 
I have attached a file, its not too big, hope you dont mind...
 
Thanks so far on the quick responses so far.
 
Lozz



  _____  

From: darren@xxxxxxxxxx
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: Problem with GPO Setting even after set to 'Not
Configured'
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 16:23:32 -0800

Alan-

Just to clarify, ntuser.pol should not exist in a default profile. It is
created on the fly (both per-user and per-computer) for a given user and, as
you correctly point out, contains the admin template policy settings (as
well as preferences by the way) for the current user. The per-user version
is held in the current user's profile directory. It is responsible for the
policy clean up process inasmuch as each time Admin. Template policy is
processed, this "archive" file is read and any policy keys found in it are
removed before the current Admin. Template policies are re-applied. So it is
possible that this .pol file somehow did not get the policy in question
added to it, and thus would not remove it. But this seems like a strange
scenario.

 

Darren

 

 

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Alan & Margaret
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:19 PM
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: Problem with GPO Setting even after set to 'Not
Configured'

 

Can you try removing the registry key manually, then reapplying the policy
and see if it comes back?

 

What I suspect you may have done is got your default Profile screwed up.
There are two files in the Default profile, the NTUser.dat file which
contains the registry keys that are in use, plus the NTUser.Pol file that
stores all of the non-tattooed polices that are to be removed. If these get
out of synch, you can have the case that NTUser.dat contains a registry key
but NTUser.Pol doesn't contain the key for removal. This will happen if when
building the default profile, you copy across NTuser.dat but not NTUSER.POL

 

This means that new users inherit a registry which contains the key but the
NTUSER.POL does not contain the key to remove it as part of tattoo
processing. However, once you manually remove it, it wont come back. While
the best way to fix it for new users is to rebuild your Default profile from
scratch, if this is the only error, you can simply remove the entry from the
NTUSER.DAT. Existing users are somewhat harder to fix. I suspect the only
way is a batch file that removes the key on a once of basis. The trouble is
that you need to leave it running until all profiles on all machines have
been fixed., 

 

Alan Cuthbertson

 

 

 Policy Management Software:-

http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir
<http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir&f=pol_summary.shtml>
&f=pol_summary.shtml

 

ADM Template Editor:-

http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir
<http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir&f=adm_summary.shtml>
&f=adm_summary.shtml

 

Policy Log Reporter(Free)

http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir
<http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir&f=policyreporter.shtml>
&f=policyreporter.shtml

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Nelson, Jamie R Contr 72 CS/SCBAF
Sent: Tuesday, 27 November 2007 4:21 AM
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: Problem with GPO Setting even after set to 'Not
Configured'

 

Then, as Darren suggested, you need to run a RSoP on that system/user

and ensure you're not getting it from somewhere else. Eliminate that

possibility first.

 

Also, are you sure GP is processing correctly on the system? When you

run your RSoP, check and see if any GP related events occurred.

 

Regards,

Jamie Nelson

 

-----Original Message-----

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

On Behalf Of TAZAMAL HUSSAIN

Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 11:12 AM

To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Subject: [gptalk] Re: Problem with GPO Setting even after set to 'Not

Configured'

 

Hi Jamie,

 

Yup... gave that a go.. rebooted few times etc but still that setting is

coming down and shown in the user registry hive. Within the GPMC

settings view of the defdompol, there is no sign that this setting

(ForcePST) is now set... and the only GPO applied to this User is

defdompol... 

 

Thanks for you reply

 

Loz  

 

> Subject: [gptalk] Re: Problem with GPO Setting even after set to 'Not

Configured'

> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:58:51 -0600

> From: Jamie.Nelson.ctr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

> To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

> 

> Have you done a 'gpupdate /force /target:user' from the command-line?

> Sometimes if you forcefully reapply the policy it will correct things

> like that.

> 

> Regards,

> Jamie Nelson

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

> On Behalf Of TAZAMAL HUSSAIN

> Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:36 PM

> To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

> Subject: [gptalk] Problem with GPO Setting even after set to 'Not

> Configured'

> 

> Hi Guys,

> 

> I have also posted this to Group Policy Forums @ Microsoft. Trying to

> get some exposure to this problem... hoping someone can shed some

light.

> I have tried to describe exactly what is going on being a descriptive

as

> possible. If I get an answer on the on the Microsoft forum i'll post

it

> over to here if anyone is interested.... 

> 

> I have pasted the Thread I have started already:

> 

> 

> 2 posts altogether:

> 

> Hey Guys,

> > 

> > Okay, although I have not found an answer yet, I *think* I have made

> some 

> > progress and am on the right lines, again if anyone has any comments

> please 

> > do let me know.

> > 

> > .... after a lot of googling everything was pointing to the fact

that

> I MUST 

> > HAVE at some point applied the Outlook ADM to the def-dom-pol with

the

> 

> > setting for 'default path for PST Files' pointing to my network

> location. 

> > After applying it I must have ripped out the ADM template from the 

> > def-dom-pol and applied it specifically to the OU where I wanted the

> GPO to 

> > apply. Hence this *probably* caused GPMC to give the output of

> 'display names 

> > for some setting cannot be found....'

> > 

> > So... in an attempt to correct this.... Within the def-dom-pol I

added

> the 

> > Outlook ADM template back in... And set the setting for the PST path

> to 'not 

> > configured'.. . Rebooted an XP client, logged in with a new user but

> still 

> > outlook is pushing the path of the PST to the network store when

> configuring a POP3 email account.

> > 

> > The strange thing still is even though I have configured the setting

> now to 

> > 'Not Configured' (and hence it does not now display in the GPMC

> settings tab 

> > for the def-dom-pol GPO as being set at all) AND the ONLY policy

that

> is 

> > applied to Users (for new users created after this change as well)

is

> the 

> > def-dom-pol ONLY, the users registry hive is still showing the

network

> location path in the 

> > ForcePST registry key under 

> > HKCU\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\Outlook..... which I thought

> was a 

> > protected registry area that doesn;t suffer from tatooing i.e.... is

> this 

> > tatooing? 

> > 

> > My head is kind of spinning now... as i think i am getting out of my

> depth... 

> > any steer would be great. All i am looking to achieve is for users

> (not within a specific OU) default outlook PST path to point to where

it

> would have pointed if I didn;t mess with this setting... its as if the

> default PST location value is now the network path if I leave this

> setting to 'Not Configured'

> > 

> > lozza 

> > 

> > 

> > 'lozza' wrote:

> > 

> > > Hi Guys,

> > > 

> > > I am confused by what is going on here.... looking for some help:

> > > 

> > > In AD i have an OU with a GPO applied. This GPO, as well as other

> user

> > > settings, sets User Configuration\Administrative Tools\Microsoft

> Office 

> > > Outlook 2003\Miscellaneous\PST Settings\Default location for PST

> files.... to 

> > > a network location (I dont have any other option!). Now my

> understanding was 

> > > that this should apply to all users within the OU that is GPO is

> linked to... 

> > > and it does, just fine, was happy until today

> > > 

> > > However....

> > > 

> > > When I create a new user in AD, and place him in any other OU that

> does not 

> > > have this GPO linked to it (and only the Default domain Policy),

> this setting 

> > > still applies to the user when configuring outlook... it

shouldn't,

> should it?

> > > 

> > > So... I went into GPMC, clicked the OU the user sits in on the

left

> hand side, 

> > > clicked 'Group Policy Inheritance' tab on the right pane and see

> that ONLY 

> > > the Default Domain Policy is being applied... which it should

be...

> good

> > > 

> > > So... I clicked on the Default domain policy on the left hand side

> pane of 

> > > GPMC and on the right hand side pane clicked the settings tab

which

> shows me 

> > > all configured settings within this GPO. AND THERE IT WAS! under

> User 

> > > Configuration, Administrative Templates, Extra Registry Settings

it

> says:

> > > 

> > > 'Display names for some settings cannot be found. You might be

able

> to 

> > > resolve this issue by updating the .ADM files used by Group Policy

 

> > > Management' 

> > > 

> > > and directly under that it specifies:

> > > 

> > > Setting:

> Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\11.0\Outlook\ForcePSTPath

> > > State: \\Network File server where PSTs are stored in the GPO its

> configured 

> > > for...

> > > 

> > > So why is this setting, that is set in another GPO specifically

> linked to one particular OU also in my Default Domain Policy? When I

> > > open the defdompol to configure it I dont see the template that

sets

> this setting, in fact I dont see any of the Microsoft 

> > > Office stuff in the defdompol GPO as I didn't add any additional

> administrative templates to the Default Domain GPO.

> > > 

> > > Truly confused and a bit worried that I've messed my default

domain 

> > > policy... does anyone know what i;m talking about?

> > > 

> > > Lozz

> 

> 

> ________________________________

> 

> The next generation of MSN Hotmail has arrived - Windows Live Hotmail

> <http://www.newhotmail.co.uk> 

> ***********************

> You can unsubscribe from gptalk by sending email to

gptalk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field OR

by logging into the freelists.org Web interface. Archives for the list

are available at http://www.freelists.org/archives/gptalk/

 

> ************************

 

 

 

________________________________

 

Get free emoticon packs and customisation from Windows Live. Pimp My

Live! <http://www.pimpmylive.co.uk> 

***********************

You can unsubscribe from gptalk by sending email to
gptalk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field OR by
logging into the freelists.org Web interface. Archives for the list are
available at http://www.freelists.org/archives/gptalk/

************************

 

  _____  

Are you the Quizmaster? Play BrainBattle with a friend now!
<http://specials.uk.msn.com/brainbattle> 

Other related posts: