I have an Exchange 2003 Standard server that I have been actively cleaning up in order to prep for an Exchange 2010 deployment. A number of years ago, our system was migrated from an Exchange 5.5 server. I was wondering if I can clean up the following address types that appear in some of our older users. The Exchange 5.5 server is long gone and I believe these types were created during the migration from or operation of EX5.5. Also, I notice that for new users a X400 address is still created, is this necessary? MBX 1 or 0 addresses X400 addresses X500 addresses

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 16:51:56 +0000, Seth.Seth wrote: >I have an Exchange 2003 Standard server that I have been actively cleaning up in order to prep for an Exchange 2010 deployment. A number of years ago, our system was migrated from an Exchange 5.5 server. I was wondering if I can clean up the following address types that appear in some of our older users. >The Exchange 5.5 server is long gone and I believe these types were created during the migration from or operation of EX5.5. Also, I notice that for new users a X400 address is still created, is this necessary? >MBX 1 or 0 addresses You can remove these. >X400 addresses No need to have new X400 addresses created. They were in the old Recipient Policies and became part of your Email Address Policies. >X500 addresses If they're there, I'd leave them alone. Removing them may produce some NDRs. --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 16:51:56 +0000, Seth.Seth wrote: >I have an Exchange 2003 Standard server that I have been actively cleaning up in order to prep for an Exchange 2010 deployment. A number of years ago, our system was migrated from an Exchange 5.5 server. I was wondering if I can clean up the following address types that appear in some of our older users. >The Exchange 5.5 server is long gone and I believe these types were created during the migration from or operation of EX5.5. Also, I notice that for new users a X400 address is still created, is this necessary? >MBX 1 or 0 addresses You can remove these. >X400 addresses No need to have new X400 addresses created. They were in the old Recipient Policies and became part of your Email Address Policies. >X500 addresses If they're there, I'd leave them alone. Removing them may produce some NDRs. --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP

> No need to have new X400 addresses created. They were in the old Recipient Policies and became part of your Email Address Policies. I can prevent exchange from creating the X400s by unchecking the X400 rule in recipient policies? It appears in two policies on my mail server. Then I can remove the X400s from the users at a later time. For the X500s, not all users have these. It's hard to determine why it's so inconsistent. I believe these were created during the migration to EX2003 when both servers were online. It looks like the address contents is the path of where the mailbox resided on EX5.5. I will leave these alone as it is possible when deleted that it could cause NDRs. I found this article on the X500 http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;196331

On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 13:47:39 +0000, Seth.Seth wrote: >> No need to have new X400 addresses created. They were in the old Recipient Policies and became part of your Email Address Policies. >I can prevent exchange from creating the X400s by unchecking the X400 rule in recipient policies? Yes. >It appears in two policies on my mail server. Then do that in both of them. >Then I can remove the X400s from the users at a later time. Or just leave them there. They aren't hurting anything. >For the X500s, not all users have these. It's hard to determine why it's so inconsistent. Because their only purpose is to act as secondary proxy addresses. They were probably added when some migration software moved a mailbox from one Exchange site to another before it was possible to do that with the MS Exchange admin tools. >I believe these were created during the migration to EX2003 when both servers were online. It looks like the address contents is the path of where the mailbox resided on EX5.5. Makes sense. You couldn't move a mailbox from one Exchange site to another when each site had it's own set of writable directory objects. Software that could do that had to keep the old directory address with the mailbox so replies to messages sent before the mailbox was moved wouldn't be returned as undeliverable (among the many other problems that accompanied such movement of mailboxes). >I will leave these alone as it is possible when deleted that it could cause NDRs. Again, they aren't hurting anything. Removing them might make things look neater but won't make things work any better. I found this article on the X500 http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;196331 That's just one migration tool that did that. The MSW was a nice tool, for its time. I used to to consolidate (collapse) our Exchange organization from nine sites to four. Then I got the heck off Exchange 5.5 and onto Exchange 2000 ASAP. The things that went on in the old directories to make that all work was ugly. It still gives me chills when I think about it. --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP