Re: Help Microsoft define the next Windows Certificate Server
From: rusga (reply2newsgroup_at_nntp)
Date: 09/29/04
- Previous message: Roch Viviene: "Re: Help Microsoft define the next Windows Certificate Server"
- In reply to: Vanguardx: "Re: Help Microsoft define the next Windows Certificate Server"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 16:22:30 +0100
Vanguardx,
Maybe MS applied SP4 on their servers and MS nntp service (that ships as
part of IIS on Win2ks) was gone (puff) like mine (and my organization's)
when I applied the same SP... The reason for this, as MS stated in their
site, was that it was a beta release, and so, not needed! (using some
other fancy words).
Needless to say that most of the organization's workflow (the droped one)
was using MS nntp service until that SP was applied.
Also needless to say is that it was not stated in the software
installation procedure that it was a beta release appart from that usual
EULA that states "... bla bla this software *AS IS*" (pls note: not *AS
WAS*!) before one opens the product.
I still don't know quite well how to face this since I still apply SPs and
patches on a stated "finished product release".
Maybe SP5 (if ever) will wipe out the entire win2ks?
Regards,
rusga
PS: All legal and contractual MS software and SP cds.
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 03:46:33 -0500, Vanguardx <see_signature> wrote:
> "Fei Chua" <feichua@hotmail.com>
> wrote in news:6f29d792.0409292234.4d109294@posting.google.com:
>> Hi, I am a Program Manager with the Microsoft PKI team focusing on the
> <snip>
>> ... Please send your list of features request
>> to feichua@nospamplease.microsoft.com. Note: you will need to remove
>> the "nospamplease." from the e-mail address before sending. ...
> <snip>
>
> One, why would a Microsoft employee that is submitting a post related to
> their employment be posting through Google Groups (as shown in the PATH
> header) rather than through Microsoft's own NNTP server?
>
> Two, Microsoft doesn't provide sufficient spam filtering to allow you to
> use an unmunged e-mail address? Doesn't bode well for Microsoft if even
> they can't figure out how to filter out the spam.
>
> Three, why would a Microsoft employee be specifying a Hotmail e-mail
> address in the From header of their post? You post with an unmunged
> Hotmail e-mail address but want replies sent to a munged microsoft.com
> e-mail address.
>
> Four, the NNTP-Posting-Host shows you sent your post from a cable
> account at Comcast (24.17.196.233 = c-24-17-196-233.client.comcast.net).
> Microsoft has suddenly required their employees to make public
> announcements from their home cable accounts?
>
> So we have someone claiming to be a Microsoft representative who posts
> through Google (instead of using Microsoft's own news server) from a
> Comcast cable account who used a Hotmail account to register for a
> Google Groups account and wants replies sent to a munged e-mail address
> at Microsoft because they must not be capable of handling the spam and
> virally-ladden e-mails that might arrive due to posting in newsgroups.
>
- Previous message: Roch Viviene: "Re: Help Microsoft define the next Windows Certificate Server"
- In reply to: Vanguardx: "Re: Help Microsoft define the next Windows Certificate Server"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
