Moderation via Transport Rule and multiple Arbitration mailboxes

Hello,
when using moderation using a Transport Rule (Transport Rule Action "forward the message to addresses for moderation") it is possible to moderate messages sent to recipients outside the exchange organization (Transport
Rule Predicate "Sent to Users Outside The Organization"). This all works perfect so far using a single arbitration mailbox.
Now I would like to add additional arbitration mailboxes for load balancing purposes. As far as I understand, different arbitration mailboxes can configured on the recipients objects which are moderated using the set-<MailEnabledObject> -ArbitrationMailbox
'XYZ'
Now, for the described case above where the recipients are external (internet) and not available within the directory, is there a way to use multiple Arbitration mailboxes anyway and if yes, how ?
Any feedback welcome. Thanks in advance

Hi,
Thank you for your post.
This is a quick note to let you know that we are performing research on this issue.
Niko Cheng
TechNet Community Support

Similar Messages

Transport Rule and Journaling rule query

HI I am using Exchange 2010
i am using transport rule and journaling agent in my setup.
i would like to know when both agents applied to an user which agent applied first transport or journaling?
Ex:
On server, I have created n Transport Rule policy for an user to to move all incoming mails deleted items for the same user i have created journaling policy to move all incoming mails journaled.
which one will get apply?
Thanks

Hi chandru CT
Thank you for your question
The transport rule will be applied firstly.
The difference between transport rule and journaling role is that transport rule make the original mail BCC to someone by mail. But Journaling role make the original mail send to someone by attachment .
Jim xu

Using Mail Transport Rules and the Exchange AWS API

I am looking to programmatically Enable and Disable hub transport rules from VS.NET and was hoping these functions would be available via the REST API. However, I can't find any references, which indicates that perhaps they don't exist.
The rules I want to access can be used from PowerShell "Enable-TransportRule" and "Disable-TransportRule" and I can use them fine from Powershell.
So, my first question is, are these rules available from the Exchange EWS API? They need to be triggered when users perform certain events within the application.
If not, I am guessing I will be able to automate these cmdlets into a C# application or ASP.NET/C# application. Is this a correct assumption?
Thanks.
Jonathan.

No you can't set Transport rules from EWS, EWS is a mailbox access API and setting Transport Rule would be considered an Administrative Task so you need to use and Admin API which for Exchange is still the Exchange Management Shell. You can automate
the EMS cmdlet with Managed code (eg you could front end them with your own rest service) using Remote Powershell the best place to start would be
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/office/jj943721(v=exchg.150).aspx
Cheers
Glen

Exchange 2010 HTML Signature via Transport Rule

We had a request to create a custom signature for our organization. I have this working via a transport rule in Exchange 2010. It works great for messages coming from a client such as Outlook or OWA.. but when a message originates from an Iphone or Android Device it does not work.
Is it possible to make the iPhone send its email as HTML by default? Or has anyone ran into this and found a solution.
Thanks

I can't find a clean answer for you.
You might use the Set-TransportRule cmdlet and one of the exception clauses to look for something in the header. I looked at an ActiveSync-generated header from my Droid (I don't have an iPhone to try this out on) and I see this:
Message-ID: [email protected]
The clause:
-ExceptIfHeaderMatchesPatterns "Message-ID:\s(\S|\s)*email.android.com"
should exclude messages sent from Droids. Of course, I can't say that it'll exclude all of them so you'll have to experiment and use trial and error.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb123534(v=exchg.150).aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa997187(v=exchg.141).aspx
You may need to experiment with the rule because I haven't tested it.
Ed Crowley MVP "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems."

Exchange 2013 Transport Rules and Exchange 2007 Decommissioning

Hello,
I recently migrated from Exchange 2010 to Exchange 2013, I do have a few traces of Exchange 2007 in the Active Directory that I would like to completely remove. The Exchange 2007 server failed earlier and wasn't decommissioned properly. I read a few articles
on how to completely remove it from AD, I am still concerned to make the changes in "ADSI Edit".
Here is the error message I receive when creating transport rules in Exchange 2013:
"You are about to create a rule in an organization where Hub Transport servers running Exchange Server 2007
exist. To ensure the rule is applied consistently across all Hub Transport servers in the organization, you must create an equivalent rule from the Exchange Management Console on an Exchange 2007 server."
I also noticed that the version of the rules remain Version: 14.0.0.0 for any new rules that I am creating in Exchange 2013.
I would really appreciate if someone can provide their views and the best practices to remove the traces of Exchange 2007 in AD.

Hi Sathish,
How about the result after using ADSI Edit ?
Best regards,
Niko Cheng
TechNet Community Support

Receiver rule, local rule and multiplicity

Hi experts,
Im a little confused wuth these things on 7.1
is the local rule in rcv det same as receiver rule??...I have neer used that option multiplicity in interface determination...
pls share ur thoughts

Hi Ravindra,
I have neer used that option multiplicity in interface determination...
In PI 7.1 there is no button for enhanced receiver determination as it is there in PI 7.0.the enhanced
Instead we have a check button for multplicity in the interface determination.
Enhanced interface determination is available directly in Interface determination in 7.1 which can be
checked in the multiplicity.
we can choose directly mapping that is 1..N and source is your sender interface.
Enhanced interface determination is available directly in Interface determination in 7.1 which can
be checked in the multiplicity
similar post .
Enhanced Interface Determination is not available for PI 7.1
Regards,
Srinivas

Transport Rule does not appear to be working

hi,
I have an exchange 2013 environment. i have a requirement to intercept inbound emails from external senders addressed to [email protected] and forward it to a single recipient.
we have an internal distribution list already using [email protected] that has 30 members.
I have setup the following rule
apply this rule if: the recipient is [email protected] and the sender is:outside of the organization
Do the following:redirect the message to [email protected]
Priority 0
Audit : not specified
mode: enforce
when i send a test email from externally all 30 people still recieve the mail. i have tried restarting the transport service. Can anyone please help me as i am struggling to see what might be wrong.
thanks
Paul

Hi paul ,
From your description i came to understand that the E-mails from the external senders addressed to the distribution group [email protected] should have to be redirected to [email protected]
As per my knowledge ,There are two ways to achieve your scenario one is via transport rule and another one is via DL restriction .
via transport rule
1.If you wanted to check whether the transport rule is applied to that message or not you should have to do the message tracking first .
2.Then you have to enable the pipeline tracing log for the particular recipient in our exchange organisation . With the help of that logs you can able to identify what are all the transport rules has applied to the messages received by the that recipient
Note: Pipeline tracing is only for troubleshooting purpose , once you have completed your troubleshooting please turn it off .
Via DL restriction :
On that particular DL If you go to the option delivery management you can able to set the restrictions .
only senders inside my organization - This is the option where you can restrict who can able send an email to this DL and it would be some of the internal recipients or all the internal recipients .
Senders inside and outside of my organization - This is the option where you can restrict who can able send an email to this DL and it would be some of the internal recipients or all the internal recipients or some of the external recipients
or all the external recipients .
you should have to create a contact in case if you wanted to provide mail sending permission to this DL only for some external recipients
Please reply me if you have any queries .
Regards
S.Nithyanandham
Thanks S.Nithyanandham

Block incoming calendar / meeting requests to a specific mailbox / user using transport rules or an Outlook rule?

I have a weird request I have never thought I would get. I have a VIP user that wants to receive no calendar invites / meeting invites from:
- anyone outside of our organization (ie: from the internet)
- only certain users from INSIDE our organization
Can I accomplish this either though a transport rule and/or an Outlook rule? I am on Exchange 2007 currently, and Outlook 2007 currently. Soon to have both on 2013 versions, migrating soon, but if possible, I need to implement this in our current environment.
Thanks in advance

Hello,
Based on your description, I understand that the VIP user don't want to receive meeting requests from anyone outside of your organization and certain users from inside your organization. If so, we can't create transport rule in exchange 2007.
I recommend you upgrade your exchange server 2007 to exchange 2013. If you use exchange 2013, you can create this transport rule like : under condition, the sender is this person (distribution
group, you can add certain users from inside your organization to a distribution group) ; the recipient is this person (the VIP user);
the message properties include the message type(Calendaring); under actions, block the message reject the message and include an explanation/ reject the message with the enhanced status code of /delete the message without notifying anyone.
You need to create the second transport rule: you only need to change the first condition: the sender is located outside the organization, and other conditions and actions are the same as the first transport rule.
If you have any feedback on our support, please click
here
Cara Chen
TechNet Community Support

Exchange transport rule so a message classification

I can create the RMS template in the RMS management utility on the RMS server, put the templates in a shared location and enable RMS by specifying a template location in a Group Policy.
The result is that
users will see the message classifications in Outlook
… but when I try to create a transport rule based on the template, the templates are not available in ECP in the dropdown for message classification (the ones you see in the example below are there b/c I added them via Exchange
powershell.
The other way to add message classifications is to create them in PowerShell on the mail server. When created this way the Message classifications show up when creating a new rule (as seen above) but
the end users don’t see them in Outlook.
One source says to make a registry change on the user’s computers:
Next, copy the XML file to a location on the client or networked location which is readable by Users. On the client, make the
following registry changes:
[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\15.0\Common\Policy]
"AdminClassificationPath"="c:\\Classifications.xml"
"EnableClassifications"=dword:00000001
"TrustClassifications"=dword:00000001
After trying both a network share and a local file, the Classifications still don’t show up in Outlook.
So the only way to get them to show up in Outlook doesn’t allow you to include them in a transport rule (and thus you’re not able to create a rule that allows forwarding inside the domain only)
and the way to get them to show up when creating a transport rule doesn’t seem to work as far as getting them to show in Outlook.
Adding them via PowerShell on the Exchange server actually does get them to show up in OWA the way you would expect, they just won't show in Outlook 2010.
I imagine the issue is with the reg entry that points Outlook to the xml
file….(and I do realize reference given is Offfice 2013) it’s entirely
possible that Office 2010 requires a new key in a slightly different place but
im only seeing references to office 2007 and 2013

Making message classification visible in Outlook 2010
On the CAS: New-MessageClassification -Name "Internal Use Only" –DisplayName “Internal Use Email” -RecipientDescription "Internal Only, Don’t forward outside Kdm"
-SenderDescription "tells recipient not to forward outside company”
From Program Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\V14\Scripts
- Run .\Export-OutlookClassification.ps1 > c:\Temp\Classifications.XML
Copy the .XML file to the test client in root of C: (tried other locs also)
Create new reg key (office 2010)
[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\14.0\Common\Policy]
"AdminClassificationPath"="C:\Classifications.xml"
"EnableClassifications"=dword:00000001
"TrustClassifications"=dword:00000001
Reboot client
Should be able to see the message classification when creating a new email.
Why can I see this in my test lab using Outlook 2013 and also see it within OWA but I cannot see the classification within Outlook 2010 (which all my users have)?
Have tried on two laptops. One with MS Office prof. and the other with prof. plus.
I am local admin on both.

Creating Transport rule : Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation.

hi,
I'm trying to create a new transport rule and get the error
Test Auto-reply
Failed
Error:
Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation.
Exchange Management Shell command attempted:
New-TransportRule -Name 'Test Auto-reply' -Comments 'test' -Priority '0' -Enabled $true -From '[email protected]' -SentTo '[email protected]' -SubjectContainsWords 'TEST' -SetHeaderName 'Reply-To' -SetHeaderValue '[email protected]'
is this at all possible?
If so what am I doing wrong?
thanks

Hi,
I tested in my lab, and I received the same error. I searched and talked with my colleagues, seems like that we can’t
set header field “Reply-To” using rule, it is the same issue for header fields “To” and “From”.
Here is a related thread about header field “From” for your reference.
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/430bf68b-f36b-485c-a2ef-3689b1ad826a/how-to-setup-a-transport-rule-to-change-the-from-field-of-an-email
Best regards,
Belinda Ma
TechNet Community Support

Transport Rule "Disclaimer" not updating...

I did a simple edit earlier today and added a single line of text to the Transport Rule "Disclaimer" and it refuses to update. I tried restarting the Hub Transport service but that didn't solve the issue.
I've sent test emails to both internal and external addresses with the same results. I've also attempted to disable the rule just to see if i could get any changes to apply in a timely manner however I'm still getting the disclaimer on emails.
Any thoughts?

Hi,
From your description, you can use Get-TransportRule command or EMC->Organization Configuration->Hub Transport->Transport
Rules to get the state, scope and priority of this transport rule:
1.
Whether the rule is enabled or disabled:   Only enabled rules are applied. When a rule is disabled, the rule does not lose its priority. However, the rule
is not included in the evaluation process.
2.
Message scope:   The first check performed by rules agents is whether a message falls within the scope of the agent. Transport rules aren't applied to all
types of messages.
3.
Priority:   For messages that fall within the scope of the rules agent, the agent starts processing rules based on rule priority in ascending order. Rules
that have lower priority are applied first. Transport rule priority values range from 0 to n-1, where n is the total number of transport rules. Only enabled rules are applied, regardless of priority. You can change the priority of rules by using the Exchange
Management Console or the Exchange Management Shell
If the issue is not solved, you can disable this transport rule and create a new transport rule to check the result.
Hope it helps. If the issue still occurs, please let us know.
Thanks
Sophia Xu
TechNet Community Support
I am having the same problem, and so far beyond restarting the transport service there have been no useful answers, including this one.
The above response doesn't even relate to the question and none of your points apply when dealing with a simple text edit to an existing rule that was already working.
If the Transport rule function is so unstable as to require it be rebuilt for every text edit, then it simply does not function as designed.

First exchange 2013 server install in coexistence: Recreating arbitration mailboxes first

Hi
We have exchange 2010 servers and I want to introduce the first exchange 2013 server.
Some of our arbitration mailboxes currently in 2010 have become corrupt and my initial exchange 2013 installation failed.
Question: Can I remove existing exchange 2010 arbitration mailboxes and recreate them using EXCHANGE 2013 "SETUP /PrepareAD"???????? Afterall there are no 2013 servers in the environment yet
I wonder if it will fail due to version incompatibilities
Thanks

Hi,
Agree with DJ Grijalva. Exchange 2013 /prepareAD will create the arbitration mailboxes for Exchange 2013. And the arbitration mailboxes between Exchange 2010 and Exchange 2013 are different. So I recommend you use the 2010 /prepareAD to recreate the arbitration
mailboxes for 2010.
Hope my clarification is helpful to you.
Best regards,
If you have feedback for TechNet Subscriber Support, contact
[email protected]
Amy Wang
TechNet Community Support

Setting a Transport Rule to reply with a Custom DSN for a Disabled User and disconnected mailbox

Here is what I am trying to accomplish. A user leaves the company. We disable there exchange email and that in turn disabled the account in AD. We want a custom NDR to say "This employee is no longer and employee blah blah" We dont get rid of email
boxes but we disable them.
Here is what I done. Created custom NDR and then created a transport rule to read if the message is sent to [email protected] reply back with this NDR code. It works fine if I disable the user from AD and not exchange. Once I "disconnect" the mailbox
it no longer works. I get the default NDR that says this email cant be found. I don't want that one. I want my custom NDR. I don't want to modify the 5.1.1 message either. Is there away around this?

Hi Nellyjo,
In your case, when you disable the user from AD and Exchange, in fact the message is blocked before reaching transport rule, recipient filtering is blocking this email. If you still want to achieve your goal by transport rule, you need to create a mailbox
or contact to make your transport rule work.
What's more, you also can modify original DSN for external and internal senders to meet your requirement.
For more information, here is a similar thread for your reference.
Setting a Transport Rule to reply with a Custom DSN for a Disabled User
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/b1a4dd86-1e0e-43a9-b340-a80352e5c323/setting-a-transport-rule-to-reply-with-a-custom-dsn-for-a-disabled-user?forum=exchange2010
Hope it helps.
If you need further assistance, please feel free to let me know.
Best regards,
Amy
Amy Wang
TechNet Community Support

Exchange Server 2013 - Mailflow - Transport Rules - Autoreply to External Email Addresses and Customizable Template

Hi There,
I have two question relating to this topic:
Question 1 - Can I set up an auto reply message (e.g. Thank you for submitting your enquiry....) to any emails that are
only external and not including our domain to the organisation for a specific email address. I need to be able to specify other domains also that I don't want this rule to be applied to?
Question 2 - If this is possible, is there a customizable template that can be used for the auto reply message?
Hopefully someone can help!

Hi Eric,
This needs to be completed from another program either exchange / ?
There is a problem if you configure this from an actual mailbox / OWA due to the lack of configuration options available.
Here's a more detailed scenario:
We have a mailbox that our records department use e.g.
[email protected] to register incoming mail from. This also has an alias that external people send to e.g.
[email protected] . We still need staff within our domain to send emails to the
[email protected] and do not want the auto message (e.g. Thank you for submitting your enquiry....) sent to those internal staff. There is the possibility of a looping being created otherwise.
Only people outside the organisation sending an email to
[email protected] should receive the auto reply message (e.g. Thank you for submitting your enquiry....).
We need the ability to add in an exception to the rule to bypass or not process the rule if the sender is a part of *@ourdomain.com which means they will not receive an auto reply. We also need
to be able to add other domain we specify e.g.
*@someoneelsedomain.com not to receive the auto reply.
We currently use MailMarshal to perform the above task but will be decommissioning this during the Exchange 2013 implementation soon to begin. We are not installing an Microsoft Edge Transport server that I believe does allow configurable rules like
this as all of our mail will first be routed through the Symantec / Telstra solution first. I'm still trying to find out if the Symantec solution can complete this process for us but I doubt it.
This is why I'm trying to find out if Exchange 2013 from the admin console somehow can complete the rules and exceptions that we require above.
Thanks
Lisa
Lisa Stanley

Arbitration mailboxes exist in root and child domains, which to delete?

Hi,
I discovered a problem with my Arbitration Mailboxes when setting up a Moderated Distribution group. The moderator wasn't receiving an email from Exchange advising that there was a message that needed to be approved or declined. A bit of digging in Message
Tracking and the Event log (IDs 9214 & 9217) revealed that the email address for the MS Exchange Approval Assistant exists twice, in both our root and child domains.
The question is which to delete, the account in root or child? All of the users are in the child domain so presumably it's the account in root which I should delete, but I'm not 100% sure.
Any pointers very welcome.
Cheers.

Hi,
Agree with Andy. The arbitration accounts are in the root domain by default. You should delete the account in child domain. Then you can use the Get-Mailbox -Arbitration | fl displayname command to check if you can get this system mailbox in child domain.
If you can't get this system mailbox in the child domain, you need to run the following command, so that the scope of the search is changed to the forest level.
Set-ADServerSettings –ViewEntireForest $true
Best regards,
Belinda
Belinda Ma
TechNet Community Support

Moderation via Transport Rule and multiple Arbitration mailboxes

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for