XPSP2 Issues: Summary #1

From: Russ (Russ.Cooper_at_RC.ON.CA)
Date: 08/16/04

  • Next message: Zeevi, Dan: "FW: MSIE Vulnerability Advisory : MSIE - New Site Spoofing - NullyFake"
    Date:         Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:03:11 -0400
    To: NTBUGTRAQ@LISTSERV.NTBUGTRAQ.COM
    
    

    In this issue;

    1. Reminder: XP SP2 Release Notes contain links to relevant KB articles
    2. Solution to the Outlook delayed display update problem.

    1. Reminder: XP SP2 Release Notes contain links to relevant KB articles
    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;835935

    2. Solution to the Outlook delayed display update problem.

    Oleg Bestseny posted a message about how, after XP SP2, Outlook did not
    immediately update the display of various folders (Inbox and Outbox.)
    His solution was to grant an exception in the Windows Firewall for the
    Outlook.exe program (restricting its scope to the Exchange Server only.)

    Several other people posted additional information, including one post
    from a Microsoft employee confirming much of what the others stated.

    Outlook updates its state with the Exchange Server (i.e. whether a
    message has been sent, or displaying new messages in the inbox) based on
    one of two methods. Outlook 2000 and 2002 both inform the Exchange
    Server of a dynamic UDP port the client establishes a listen on in order
    to receive notifications. If that fails to receive notifications, it
    will revert to polling the Exchange Server every 60 seconds. Outlook
    2003 starts by polling, and if it receives a UDP notification it will
    then stop polling and rely upon the UDP notifications.

    Two trains of thought here. Receiving UDP notifications may cause less
    traffic, since they will only happen when a notification is needed.
    Polling is constant, every 60 seconds, regardless whether there's
    something pending for the client or not. Receiving UDP notifications
    means the client must allow inbound UDP traffic to an unknown,
    dynamically assigned, port. That means a Firewall rule must be extremely
    permissive (allow inbound UDP from anyport to anyport from Exchange
    Server.) Outlook 2003 has a registry value allowing you to specify a
    specific UDP port for this traffic.

    Outlook 2000 and 2002 can have a registry key specified to prevent it
    from trying UDP, forcing it to do polling, thereby eliminating the
    permissive Firewall rule.

    Registry keys for Outlook 2000 to force polling;
    <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304849>
    Registry keys for Outlook 2002 to force polling;
    <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;305572>
    Registry key for Outlook 2003 fixed UDP port;
    <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;264035>

    Just as an FYI, the following two KB articles describe how to configure
    Exchange Server so that RPC connections always occur on a static port.
    This is excellent for Firewalls, although its not necessary for the
    Windows Firewall.

    Registry keys for assigning static RPC ports for Outlook RPC access to
    Exchange Server 4.0/5.0/5.5
    <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;148732>
    Registry keys for assigning static RPC ports for Outlook RPC access to
    Exchange Server 2000/2003
    <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;270836>

    Dean A. Cleaver suggested using RPC over HTTP, which he says does not
    experience this problem.

    neo@neostorm.net, R.Crayk, Bruce Ahrendt, Tim Evans, Cenk Kulacoglu, and
    Robert Mezzone contributed to this report.

    Cheers,
    Russ - NTBugtraq Editor

    -----
    NTBugtraq Editor's Note:

    Want to reply to the person who sent this message? This list is configured such that just hitting reply is going to result in the message coming to the list, not to the individual who sent the message. This was done to help reduce the number of Out of Office messages posters received. So if you want to send a reply just to the poster, you'll have to copy their email address out of the message and place it in your TO: field.
    -----


  • Next message: Zeevi, Dan: "FW: MSIE Vulnerability Advisory : MSIE - New Site Spoofing - NullyFake"

    Relevant Pages

    • RE: win xp sp1 changes ICF settings/rules and/or default behavior for snmp packet processing on udp
      ... I forgot to mention the Outlook version I was using. ... has the following ports open right now (Exchange server connection, ... win xp sp1 changes ICF settings/rules and/or default behavior ... address and a randomly assigned UDP port number for new mail notifications. ...
      (Focus-Microsoft)
    • Re: RPC Over HTTP cannot connect
      ... All other registry keys are there and I have not rebooted the Exchange ... registry keys on the Exchange server. ... some registry keys on the Exchange server + Windows 2003 DC/GCs.) ... to connect the Outlook I am prompted for a user name and password ...
      (microsoft.public.outlook.installation)
    • Re: outlook and exchange seems connected, but..
      ... Is there anything between server and client that would block ... A firewall rule would read source port ANY to ... UDP is the first to get dropped when the network link gets busy. ... ps - to verify the above, rather than restarting Outlook. ...
      (microsoft.public.outlook)
    • Re: Outlook-Exchange Synchronization
      ... Outlook does not poll an Exchange Server for new mail, ... pushes new email notifications to outlook clients via UDP as messages ... If you aren't getting notifications or new mail suddenly appears ...
      (microsoft.public.outlook.installation)
    • Re: SP2-Outlook Mail-No Notification
      ... This actualy happens after the OL 2002 SP1 install. ... The issue is UDP vs. RPC for New mail notifications. ... Unfortunatly when you instal SP1 for Outlook 2002 You will notice a new ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)