Mailbox Folders

[nick]

Is there a way to prevent users from creating personal folders in their
mailbox which would then increase storage on the server?

[jamest...@gmail.com]

Sorry, I'm not exactly understanding your question, can you provide
some more detail or an example of what you're trying to prevent and
accomplish?

James Chong
MCSE M+, S+, MCTS, Security+
msexchangetips.blogspot.com

[Ed Crowley [MVP]]

Folders take up practically no storage.
--
Ed Crowley
MVP - Exchange
"Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"

"nick" <ciphe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156539077.7...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

[nick]

The problem is that at my company everyone wants to keep all their old
emails. So they get an email from a certain client, and put it away in
his or her folder. So if thirty different clients email then they
create thirty different folders in their mailbox.

After months you have hundreds of megs of size taken up in there. So is
there a way to prevent them from creating those folders which would
then hold space on the server? That way they would be forced to save
them locally.

Does this make sense? I'm not the bext explainer of things.

[Andy David - MVP]

On 26 Aug 2006 10:40:32 -0700, "nick" <ciphe...@gmail.com> wrote:

>The problem is that at my company everyone wants to keep all their old
>emails. So they get an email from a certain client, and put it away in
>his or her folder. So if thirty different clients email then they
>create thirty different folders in their mailbox.
>
>After months you have hundreds of megs of size taken up in there. So is
>there a way to prevent them from creating those folders which would
>then hold space on the server? That way they would be forced to save
>them locally.
>
>Does this make sense? I'm not the bext explainer of things.

So impose mailbox size limits and let them work within that. The
ability to create or not create folders really has nothing to do with
their ability to save their email.

As for saving the emails locally, you still have to back up the
locally saved stuff , or not.

But if the email is important, you may want it on the mail server
instead or think about investing in an archival solution.

[nick]

I really appreciate the advice. I'll look into an archival solution.
Thanks.

[Ed Crowley [MVP]]

There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems.

Who are you to say that they don't need their old e-mail? Who died and
appointed you god? It is my experience that many users have very valid
reasons for needing to archive their e-mail, like salespeople. Think about
this. Depending on your organizaiton, one gained sales lead aided by an old
e-mail message could very well pay for all his e-mail usage costs for a
lifetime.

You should punt this to your boss, and he and your company's management
should make an thoughtful decision about e-mail storage policies. Don't
leave an archival system out of the picture because, depending on your
business need, it could easily pay for itself.

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

"nick" <ciphe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1156614032.2...@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...

[jamest...@gmail.com]

I love your quote! "There are seldom good technological solutions to
behavioral problems."

James Chong

[nick]

So let me see if I understand this by way of review:

1. They could copy their folders to their local system, but if their
computer goes down then all that is lost.
2. They could leave it on the server, but if the server can't hold
anymore then they lose whatever they have unless ExMerge can rescue
some.
3. Their PST files could be backed up and their folders left on the
local system, but this also isn't fullproof.

So, if they want to have access to and keep all their old emails we
should use some kind of archival system? I'm not the sharpest IT knife
so sorry if I'm redunadant.

[jamest...@gmail.com]

Yes. The archival industry is gaining more prominence because admins
are finding that .PST management is unrealistic in enterprise
environments and second to be Sarbanes Oaxley compliant. You can look
into some third party archival systems such as GFI. By the way what
version of Exchange are you using, and number of users you're currently
supporting and do you currently have a MB quota policy in place?

James Chong
MCSE |M+, S+, MCTS, Security+
msexchangetips.blogspot.com

[nick]

We're running Exchnage Server 2000. I have the mailboxes set at 350MB
before a warning kicks out. Then at 500MB you can't send. At 800MB you
can't send or receive.

[Ed Crowley [MVP]]

Thanks!

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

<jamest...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156771472....@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...

[Ed Crowley [MVP]]

Those are pretty generous quotas.

You should work with your management to determine whether these need to be
increased based on business requirements, based on what the costs of
additional storage, servers or archival systems are.

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

"nick" <ciphe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1156796214.2...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...