Modifying Default GAL

Hello,

On our campus, Exchange 2003 is the official calendaring solution but not
everyone uses Exchange as their exclusive mail server. There are two
distinct mail systems, an Microsoft Exchange 2003 organization and Sun Mail.
Likewise, there are two different authentication sources, LDAP and Active
Directory 1.1. The LDAP accounts (along with passwords) are pushed into AD.

Recently, we created an address list in Exchange System Manager under
Recipients -> All Address Lists to show those individuals without Exchange
mailboxes. The address list displays all the user accounts just fine and the
email address field looks great in Outlook 2007. However, when we email
individuals without an Exchange mailbox, the email comes back right away with
an NDR that â??The message could not be delivered because the recipient's
destination email system is unknown or invalidâ??. After looking at the
address list entries in Outlook 2003, which shows the Exchange address, I see
that the accounts without Exchange attributes show up like /o=NT5/OU=839DABâ?¦
instead of /o=Illinois State University/ou=â?¦

So weâ??d like to Exchange email address enable all AD accounts without
Exchange attributes so that Exchange customers can easily email users of the
Sun Mail. Thatâ??s easy enough to do. However, the Sun Mail handles the mail
needs of our students so departments created AD accounts for student workers
so we can give them an Exchange mailbox. When we email-address enable all
accounts, then students will appear twice in the GAL and we think that will
lead to some confusion. So I had the idea of modifying the GAL to exclude
accounts that have just been email-address enabled and asking customers to
use the default â??All Usersâ?? list to look up those individuals without
Exchange mailboxes. Iâ??ve modified the LDAP query for the Default GAL and
created a proposed Default GAL which does what I want and which several
individuals have checked out as ok.

The ESM GUI has the modify button for the Default GAL grayed out even when
after I disabled the inheritance of permissions (copying the previous
permissions) and removing the deny permission that my admin account had. It
appears to me that I will have to modify the attribute purportedSearch of the
Default GAL with ADSI edit in order to change the LDAP query of the Default
GAL.

Has anyone else been in a similar situation? How did you overcome it? Has
anyone modified the LDAP query for the default GAL in an Exchange 2003
organization? Is this something I should be doing? Please let me know if I
can clarify something or provide more information.

Thanks,
Bill

Ed
Tue Aug 07 17:51:11 CDT 2007

Everyone who tries to use Exchange for calendaring and not e-mail report
problems doing so in these forums. You probably don't want to hear this, but
if you want to keep your users from being confused and angry, pick a single
messaging system to do everything. If that system is not Exchange, then you
probably ought to choose a different calendar solution, such as Corporate
Time, instead of Exchange. I can confidently propose that there's no good
solution to the problems you face other than that, and that's backed up by
my experience of never seeing a better solution posted.

--
Ed Crowley
MVP - Exchange
"Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"


"William Hamann" <WilliamHamann@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AB6D55A1-825F-4937-85A7-FB642DE0E067@microsoft.com...
> Hello,
>
> On our campus, Exchange 2003 is the official calendaring solution but not
> everyone uses Exchange as their exclusive mail server. There are two
> distinct mail systems, an Microsoft Exchange 2003 organization and Sun
> Mail.
> Likewise, there are two different authentication sources, LDAP and Active
> Directory 1.1. The LDAP accounts (along with passwords) are pushed into
> AD.
>
> Recently, we created an address list in Exchange System Manager under
> Recipients -> All Address Lists to show those individuals without Exchange
> mailboxes. The address list displays all the user accounts just fine and
> the
> email address field looks great in Outlook 2007. However, when we email
> individuals without an Exchange mailbox, the email comes back right away
> with
> an NDR that "The message could not be delivered because the recipient's
> destination email system is unknown or invalid". After looking at the
> address list entries in Outlook 2003, which shows the Exchange address, I
> see
> that the accounts without Exchange attributes show up like
> /o=NT5/OU=839DAB.
> instead of /o=Illinois State University/ou=.
>
> So we'd like to Exchange email address enable all AD accounts without
> Exchange attributes so that Exchange customers can easily email users of
> the
> Sun Mail. That's easy enough to do. However, the Sun Mail handles the
> mail
> needs of our students so departments created AD accounts for student
> workers
> so we can give them an Exchange mailbox. When we email-address enable all
> accounts, then students will appear twice in the GAL and we think that
> will
> lead to some confusion. So I had the idea of modifying the GAL to exclude
> accounts that have just been email-address enabled and asking customers to
> use the default "All Users" list to look up those individuals without
> Exchange mailboxes. I've modified the LDAP query for the Default GAL and
> created a proposed Default GAL which does what I want and which several
> individuals have checked out as ok.
>
> The ESM GUI has the modify button for the Default GAL grayed out even when
> after I disabled the inheritance of permissions (copying the previous
> permissions) and removing the deny permission that my admin account had.
> It
> appears to me that I will have to modify the attribute purportedSearch of
> the
> Default GAL with ADSI edit in order to change the LDAP query of the
> Default
> GAL.
>
> Has anyone else been in a similar situation? How did you overcome it?
> Has
> anyone modified the LDAP query for the default GAL in an Exchange 2003
> organization? Is this something I should be doing? Please let me know if
> I
> can clarify something or provide more information.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
>