Unity Connection 8.5 single inbox with Exchange 2003 - Access denied

Hi,
I'm using CUCMBE 8.5.1.12900-7 Unrestricted. i'm following Unified Messaging Guide for Cisco Unity Connection Release 8.5 and Later for configuring single inbox. I have successfully setup and tested unified messaging service when I subscribe this service to a particular user and test it, I get following error:
Issue: Failed accessing [email protected] on 192.168.0.10
Recommendations: Some possible reasons for 401: Incorrect service account name or password. Service account password expired. Proper permissions not granted to service account. Exchange mailbox uninitialized.
Details: HTTP status=[401 Unauthorized] diagnostic=[Bad response from server, HTTP code returned: 401] url=[http://192.168.0.10/exchange/
[email protected]] request=[<?xml version="1.0"?> <D:propfind xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:fh="urn:schemas:httpmail:" xmlns:h="http://schemas.microsoft.com/repl/"> <D:prop> <fh:msgfolderroot/> </D:prop> </D:propfind> ] response=[<html><head><title>Error</title></head><body>Error: Access is Denied.</body></html>]
I have verified above mentioned recommendations but no such issue exists. Any ideas?

Hi Muhammad,
I am having exactly the same issue in configuring sinlgle inbox with unity connection 8.6 and exchange 2003. I have checked everything but no result. Could you please help in configuring?
Thanks
The validation results for the user unified messaging service account [email protected] with service E2K302 are the following:
Service "E2K302": AuthenticationMode=NTLM [use HTTP] Server=[E2K3-02.chelloit1.local] Type=[Exchange 2003] Username=[chelloit1.local\agokharu]
Failed accessing [email protected] on E2K3-02.chelloit1.local
Some possible reasons for 401: Incorrect service account name or password. Service account password expired. Proper permissions not granted to service account. Exchange mailbox uninitialized.
HTTP status=[401 Unauthorized] diagnostic=[Bad response from server, HTTP code returned: 401] url=[http://E2K3-02.chelloit1.local/exchange/[email protected]] request=[<?xml version="1.0"?> http://schemas.microsoft.com/repl/"> ] response=[ErrorError: Access is Denied.]

Similar Messages

Unity Connection 8.5 Single Inbox with Verisign Certificates

Hi,
I am trying to connect CUC 8.5.1.12900-7 to Exchange 2010 using Basic authentication with SSL.
I am having problems when I get to the test user stage and think the problem may be caused by certificates.
To obtain the certificates that I have installed on CUC I got one of the users to connect to OWA and then exported the certificates associated with the connection and then loaded then onto CUC - is this the right way to do it? - there does not seem to be any documentation that covers this in detail.
Can anyone point me in the right direction or at least let me know how to troubleshoot the problem?
Thanks

You want to export the root CA certificate from OWA and import it to both the tomcat-trust and connection-trust stores. When I did this last week on 8.6(1)a I did not have to restart Tomcat although that has been required in the past. You can spot the root CA certificate by choosing the Certificate Path tab, selecting the highest certificate in the chain, opening it, select the Details tab, and click Copy to File. When you save it you will want the Base-64 encoded file and need to manually change the file extension from .CRT to .PEM.
Additionally, you can rule SSL out by unchecking the Validate Certificates for Exchange Servers checkbox. This will allow the SSL session even if the certificate fails validation.
Other issues I have seen:
The permissions granted to the Exchange user did not delegate to that user/mailstore or you accidentally missed a step.
The AutoDiscover folder in IIS is not allowing Basic authentication. The Exchange architect I worked with last week wouldn't enable this so I ended up using NTLM authentication instead since both EWS and AutoDiscover were allowing Integrated WIndows Auth.

Cisco Unity Connection Single inbox with Exchange 2010

I have a new installation of Unity Connection 8.6.2 using single inbox with an Exchange 2010 cluster frontended by a Netscaler load balancer.Functionality that does not work is when a new message comes into outlook and the message is read or deleted it does not update the status on the phone- IE turn off the MWI or if the message is deleted it is still a new message in Unity. If you click reset in the user unified message account, the status gets updated.
TAC says its a blocked port on Exchange TCP 7080 but that is open.

I followed this document :
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/connection/8x/unified_messaging/guide/85xcucumg020.html
but when i try to integrate CUC with exchange 2010 , i didn't find is clear enough
do you have Step by Step more clear than that link becouse my lab very close to your case.
Regards

Unity 4.2 voice mail only with Exchange 2003

Hi Team,
we are replacing window 2000 OS with Win 2003 for unity 4.2. This is a single box solution. Exchange 2000 is installed on same unity server. Now we are upgrading the OS from 2000 to 2003. With window 2003 we have to installed the Exchange 2003. In unity installation 4.0(5) following paragraph is mentioned which means we need separate hardware for Exchange. Kindly advise whether we need a separate server for Exchange 2003 or we can install on the on unity box.
If you are using Exchange 2003, install Exchange 2003 administration software on the Cisco Unity server. (Exchange 2003 is installed on a separate server.)
If you are using Exchange 2000, you can install Exchange 2000 either on the Cisco Unity server or on a separate server. If you install Exchange 2000 on a separate server (typically for systems with a large number of subscribers), install Exchange 2000 administration software on the Cisco Unity server.
BR
Muhammad Irfan

Thank you Javalenc,
I can understand from following that Exchange 2003 can be installed on same server.
Voice Messaging
•Exchange 2003 on the Cisco Unity server or on a separate server. If you want to install Exchange 2003 on the Cisco Unity server, note the following:
–The Cisco Unity server must be running Windows Server 2003.
–Exchange 2003 can be installed only on the currently shipping servers supported for use with Cisco Unity 4.2 (MCS-78xx-x2, MCS-78xx-x3, or later, including IBM and HP equivalents). Currently shipping servers are listed in the Cisco Unity Supported Platforms List at http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/voicesw/ps2237/
As you know we are just replacing the OS, from win 2K to 2k3. So any thing I need to take care to back up the existing Unity with win 2000 and exchange 2000..
I am taking the back up of my unity 4.2 installed on window 2000 with DiRT and will restore on unity 4.2 with win 2003 and Exchange 2003.
Kindly advise.
BR

Unity Connection 8.5.1ES16.11900-16 upgrade for Single Inbox with Exchange 2007 ?

Hello friends,
I'm currentely running Unity Connection 8.5.1ES16.11900-16.
I would like to use the single inbox feature with Exchange 2007.
It is in the documentation that we need at least Unity Connection 8.5(1) Service Update 1 (UCSInstall_UCOS_8.5.1.11900-21.sgn.iso).
I downloaded, checked MD5 but when searching on the FTP directory it won't accept it (No valid upgrade options were found). Is this a supported upgrade?
Same happens with the localization file in Portuguese that i need to install: uc-locale-pt_PT-8.5.1.1-16.cop.sng ...
Please can you give me some hints about what I may be doing wrong?
Thank you very much and warm regards,
met

Hi Met,
Hope all is well
I think you are hitting this caveat. Although the numbers don't match exactly I'm
pretty sure you will need to wait for an 8.5.1.12xxx.x ES
If the Connection server is running an engineering special with a full Cisco Unified Communications
Operating System version number between 8.5.1.11001-x and 8.5.1.11899-x, do not upgrade the server
to Connection 8.5(1) SU 1 because the upgrade will fail. Instead, upgrade the server with an ES released
after 8.5(1) SU 1 that has a full Unified Communications OS version number of 8.5.1.12xxx.x or later
to get the SU 1 functionality.
http://www.cisco.com/web/software/282074295/44508/851su1cucrm.pdf
Cheers!
Rob

Cisco Unity Connection 8.5 Single Inbox - Unified Messaging?

For the Cisco Unity Connection 8.5, to enable Single inbox unified messaging do we need to get additional licensing for this feature?

Hi Ali,
LicIMAPSubscribersMax
Users with IMAP access to voice messages or with single inbox (single inbox available in Connection 8.5 and later only)
Sets the maximum number of users who can use:
•A third-party IMAP client to access voice messages.
•The unified messaging feature "Synchronize Connection and Exchange Mailboxes (Single Inbox)" on the Unified Messaging > Unified Messaging Services page and on the Users > Users > Unified Messaging Accounts page.
For single inbox, the total number of users in classes of service for which single inbox is enabled must not exceed the licensed maximum. This applies regardless of the number of users in those classes of service who are configured to use single inbox. In addition, all users who are configured for single inbox must be in a class of service for which single inbox is enabled.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/connection/8x/administration/guide/8xcucsag310.html
Cheers!
Rob
"And if I should fall behind
Wait for me" - Springsteen

Unity Connection 8.5 Single Inbox Maximum File Size

Hi,
I have a customer who is using Live Record with Single Inbox & quite commonly the calls they are recording are going for upto an hour. This is obviously resulting in large voicemail sizes.
They are finding that long recordings (ie 20 minutes) are not being sent to their Outlook account. Is this limited in the settings somewhere or is there a maximum that anyone knows of? The Exchange Admin assures me that they should be able to receive upto 50MB emails which is more than enough.
Cheers
Russell

Stanley,
Exchange was the issue. Fix was found by Seppe in TAC - worked with him on a couple of occasions and he is one of the best. His email is below:
Changed the following settings in exchange server to receive 50 MB attachment:
1.        Edit
C:\Program Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\V14\ClientAccess\Owa\web.config and update the maxRequestLength value to 51200
2.        Open a command prompt and execute the following commands:
cd %windir%\system32\inetsrv
appcmd set config "Default Web Site/ews" -section:requestFiltering -requestLimits.maxAllowedContentLength:51200000
appcmd set config "Default Web Site/owa" -section:requestFiltering -requestLimits.maxAllowedContentLength:51200000
3.        Edit
C:\Program Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\V14\ClientAccess\exchweb\ews\web.config and change the maxReceivedMessageSize value to 51200000 underneath the
4.        Restart IIS service to apply the change
Recommending to do this off-hours and take a backup of configuration files before doing any change.

Unity Connection Office 365 Single Inbox - 100 Users Limitation

Hi all,
Goiing over the Unity Connection release notes:
Cisco Unity Connection 8.6(2) Support for Microsoft Office 365
Revised 13 April, 2012
In Cisco Unity Connection 8.6(2) and later, you can configure Connection to synchronize voice messages in Connection user's mailbox with the user's Exchange Online mailbox configured on Microsoft Office 365 environment. Microsoft Office 365 is a cloud hosted collaboration solution provided by Microsoft.
Cisco Unity Connection 8.6(2) SU1 is qualified for 100 users with Microsoft Office 365. For scalability beyond 100 users, you need to contact UCBU Product Management team through [email protected] mailer.
Note The integration beyond 100 users will not be supported by TAC until the BU has signed off on it.
I was aware of the 19 users per Unified Messaging account issue, in which we created several UM Service accounts as a temporary fix until Microsoft lifts the limitation. I wasn't aware of the above that there is a limitation to 100 Users total.
There has been a few posts regarding the 19 user/account issue in which the workaround has been to create up to 20 UM accounts to get up to 380 users as a temporary solution.
Any insight as to when this will be lifted or detailed timelines would be great!
Thanks,
Chris

Hey Chris,
I wouldn't go that route as you nicely noted. The specific locales for su2 are not shown
and I'm pretty confident that this bug would carry over to su2 as well
But then again....I could be way off base here
CSCty54979 - 8.6.x release notes should detail what builds are required for locales
Symptom:
Release notes for Unity Connection 8.6(2a) and 8.6(2a)SU1 are not clear about what builds the use of locales (localizations) are supported with and where they can be acquired
Conditions:
Customers wishing to support non-US English (ENU) languages with Unity Connect 8.6.x
Workaround:
For Unity Connection 8.6(2a), you must install ES12 and use the locale files that are labeled as ES12. The locale files are posted on cisco.com for download, but Unity Connection ES12 is not (you will need to open a TAC case and request a copy of 8.6(2)ES12)
For Unity Connection 8.6(2a)SU1, the 8.6(2)ES12 locales should NOT be used. An updated set of locales will be posted for use with this build in the near future (expected by roughly mid to late April 2012). Also note that if you are currently using the 8.6(2)ES12 locales, you should NOT upgrade to SU1 until the SU1 locales are posted to cisco.com so that you can use them.
If su2 is equivalent to ES44 then they aren't shown on this doc either??
http://www.cisco.com/web/software/Voice/pdf/LocalizationSupportforCUCESreleases.pdf
Cheers!
Rob
"May your heart always be joyful
May your song always be sung" - Bob Dylan

Single inbox for exchange and office 365

hi , we have single inbox for exchange configured, customer now has some test users on office 365.
can we have integrations to both environments on same unity connection box? Broadly speaking, would that be a new service to office 365 with the office 365 users using that service? regards
jag

http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCug48560
This patch did not make it in 8.62 su3

Outlook 2013 not compatible with Exchange 2003

Hello
Some of my customers bought SBS 2003 R2 just before SBS 2008 was released so they have systems which are only 4+ years old. SBS 2003 came with Exchange 2003 pre-installed. Outlook 2013 does not support Exchange 2003. So they cannot upgrade their Outlook
clients to 2013 version.
Microsoft, is this correct?!

If this post is hard to read, it's because of Dragonsoft!! (sometimes it is like auto-correct on the phone - "I said WHAT!??")
Overall I think this is the most interesting thread that I have ever read on Microsoft.com.
As a computer for professional for over 30 years, I've always followed the context that software products are designed for a three to five-year term, to have more is a luxury.
When I was first in the industry (1983), Microsoft had a tendency to change the software versions every year to two years. As we approached the era of Windows XP there was an expected lifetime use of three years. Every two years a new product would appear.
So, when windows XP lasted well beyond the three-year term, it was pretty exciting to not have to spend money on new product, and we all enjoyed the decade of Windows XP.
The new generation of IT professionals has somehow believe that software products should live more than five years, and it just blows my mind!
The reason that I make this post, is because I've used SBS ever since Back Office Server 4.5, and the versions of small business server (now called Small Business Server) have always appeared on the market 1 to 3 years after the primary versions of
Windows for which they are named. So I always felt that there was a disadvantage to using small business server in that the products appearing inside of SBS had been on the market for a few years before being incorporated into the SBS package. It
made me feel, at first, that Microsoft was waiting on the level of maturity within the product before creating the SBS package. Now that I look back on the whole process it made me think that the SBS team had some difficulty merging the products into a install
package which could handle the intricacies of the licensing limitations on the SBS system.
SBS 2003 was a great tool when it came out, but I found that it was riddled with security holes. To say the least some of my first SBS 2003 servers had their exchange system hacked by outside influences. (These were external facing servers who had websites
and exchange server running with public domain names, even though there were firewalls!) After a few patches, DNS modifications, reverse DNS entries, and some changes in the exchange system, I was finally able to make the system secure and solid.
My first real nightmare with SBS was when upgrading to SBS 2003 R2, which, yes, appeared around 2005. You cannot simply upgrade a machine from SBS to a new version. You must purchase a new server, install the new SBS version, and migrate your
entire installation to this new host. (While running SBS 2003 for several years and making backups on a tape, I realized that the new hardware on the market would not support a restore from my tape backup!) The whole process is rather daunting as not
all of the detailed steps to upgrade work as expected. I had to call, and pay, Microsoft to complete the process because exchange had trouble during the migration.
So off we went with our new installation of SBS 2003 R2. Then along came SBS 2008! I went through the same steps again... new hardware, new software, and, yes, paid Microsoft, again, for support to migrate.
When SBS 2011 appeared on the scene I was willing to upgrade again. Having gone through this, twice now, I fully prepared the client to purchase a new system and to purchase the new software. But because I was faced with the whole entire
nightmare of new hardware, migration, and having to call Microsoft to complete the process, I decided on a new approach. This time we were going to buy server which would run VMware. (I was not going to get stuck in a hardware box that I could not replace
if I ever needed to restore the operating system due to a massive failure.) So off I went, purchasing a new box, installing VMware, and installing my favorite operating system, Microsoft SBS!
Well, to say the least, it wasn't exactly as exciting as I had expected. Had some trouble getting VMware to settle into the new hardware, as there seemed to be some compatibility issues, but was able to work it out. Eventually, I was able to get started
on the migration. Things went well up until the point that I got to the exchange migration, and ran into a similar problem as before! A call to Microsoft revealed that it was even a little daunting for the support personnel, but as I documented the things
that they modified, and even performed a little cleanup, after they performed their cleanup! I can happily say that I'm no longer worried about hardware issues, when it comes to restoring my SBS server in case of a failure!
Overall I'm pleased with having used Microsoft SBS solutions over the past 10 years, but I would never expect, nor would I lead my customer to expect, that a product should last 10 years!
Previous comments have indicated that server should last seven years because they can be depreciated that way, I believe that to be entirely false! I live in Texas, and the state of Texas DIR program has adopted standards which state that
you should replace your hardware every five years! State agencies have this as a requirement, and it is not optional! Many state agencies have gone to leasing their equipment, which is a three-year term. (Where do you think off-lease equipment comes
from, anyway?)
One of my primary clients looked at me one day, and directly ask, "Okay, if we spend the $10,000 on the new server and software, how long should it last?"
Obviously, I wanted to say, "Forever!" But, remembering something that my mother had said (always plan for the worst and you always come out on top!), I said back to them, "I believe we should plan for a three-year lifespan, and if we get
any more than that, it will be a luxury." Needless to say, there have been some upgrades which lasted well more than three years, but there have been some which have been spot on.
The SBS server is a huge savings over purchasing the individual products separately. But there have always been some drawbacks during the upgrade process which makes the entire feasibility of the installation top-heavy when it comes to support costs.
I have noticed is that the SBS servers require more labor to keep them running smooth, especially with backup procedures and backup software, as SBS always requires a third-party product to make a "real" (restorable) backup.
A client's expectations should be that you are taking care of their business without them having to worry about what takes place in the tech room. They understand, and realize, that they can pay you a specific amount of money for your support without necessarily
having to purchase new hardware. But a good, healthy relationship with your client means that they should always be willing to upgrade, whether it is a workstation or server.
If you allow a client to be painted in a corner, then it's not their fault, it's your fault! Because, they have no idea what the new technology can do, and don't realize what's on the market. It's your job to keep up with what's current and to deliver
expectations which make them realize that each year has a dollar value attached to it, whether it is spent, or not.
If you have a client is unwilling to spend money to upgrade their equipment, then there's something else wrong with their business, and you should probably consider that they may not be in business for very long. So don't make it your problem when
they are unwilling to spend money. You don't work for free.
One last, quick example of the conversation that I had with a client who was unwilling to upgrade because things seem to be working so well. I put it like this, "You pay me to make certain that your business operates in good times and in
bad. Right now, everything is fine. If your building were to burn, and the only thing we had were the backups, I cannot go out and purchase new hardware and restore your system successfully. The equipment that we have operating here is no longer
available on the market. If I were to find the equipment, it would be out-of-date, and most likely, used, and I cannot guarantee its compatibility or functionality. So, if I can't restore your system to an operational status, then what would you do?
I don't believe there are any number of man-hours you can use to recover the information lost. You would probably have to go out of business! If your business becomes my business, then I would try to move to a position where my data is safe and my business
can continue in the case of catastrophe. The only way I can do this, is to purchase new hardware, new software, and put you back in a position of compatibility with the market. One of the things I always try to do is keep your business operations at a point
where if I die, someone else can come in and take my place. The whole idea here is to keep your business going."
It didn't take them long to come back and surprise me, "Make a list of what you need. Don't give us a list of what we need to get by, tell us what we need to be productive for several years. We don't want to patch this together
and always have problems."
And just as a note, your customer can write off $10,000+ per year for new equipment purchases. I think the number may be higher now. I had one customer who purchased a $15,000 system in December and wrote off $10,000 in one year and the other $5000,
a month later, in the next year!

Require Passcode Immediately with Exchange 2003 and iPhone 3.0?

Before I upgraded to iPhone 3.0 I was syncing with Exchange 2003 SP2 and I had set my passcode to be required after 1 hour, which was changed from the default of 4 hours. On the Exchange server we have a policy in place to have a max of 12 hours before a passcode is required which works on my WM phones.
After upgrading to 3.0, the phone now immediately requires a passcode every time I turn it on. I went into the settings to change it to be a little longer, but the only option is to have it Immediately and I have lost all of the other options. Is there a way to get back at least 1 hour or something that reflects the 12 hour setting on my Exchange server?

I can confirm that you just need to turn OFF Mail, Contacts and Calendar sync within the Exchange account, set the timeout 4 hours (or whatever - it will automatically shrink down if your Exchaange administrator's policy is more restrictive), and then turn back ON Mail, Contacts and Calendar sync.
Note you'll get a scary warning that says all your Contacts and Calendar data will be deleted from the phone - Outlook users can ignore if you're syncing with Outlook, since it will re-sync when done.

Will Microsoft Exchange2000 Portlet work with Exchange 2003

Hi All,
Has anyone tried using Microsoft Exchange2000 Portlet with Exchange 2003 ? Or is there any Portlet available for Exchange 2003 ?
Thanks in Advance.
Dipak

I'm facing problem with Exchange 2003 portlet which is not working with all users. it's working good only with the one user. I mean it doesn't allow the other users to put there user name & Password .
Please help me with this portlet or is there other portlet for exchange 2003
Thanks
Waleed

Can't Create a Data Source - Failed to test connection. [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (Connect()).]SQL Server does not exist or access denied

Hi there,
I am having a serious issue with The Power BI Data Management Gateway which I am hoping that someone can help me with.
Basically I am setting a connection between a Power BI demo site and a SQL 2012 Database based on Azure. The Data Management Gateway and is up and running, and Power BI has managed to connect to it successfuly.
By following the tutorials at
here I was able to successful create my Data Connection Gateway with a self-signed certificate.
However, when trying to create the data source I come into problems. The Data Source Manager manages to successfully resolve the hostname, as per the screenshot below:
Bear in mind that I exposed the require ports in Azure as endpoints and I managed to modify my hosts file on my local machine so I could access the SQL server hosted in Azure using its internal name -- otherwise I would not be able to get this far.
However the creation of the data source also fails when trying to created it whilst logged in the SQL server in question:
The Data Source Manager returns the error when using the Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server:
Failed to test connection. [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (Connect()).]SQL Server does not exist or access denied
I tried using the SQL Server Native Client 11.0 instead but I also get an error. This time the error is:
Failed to test connection. Login timeout expiredA network-related or instance-specific error has occurred while establishing a connection to SQL Server. Server is not found or not accessible. Check if instance name is correct and if SQL Server is configured to allow remote connections. For more information see SQL Server Books Online.Named Pipes Provider: Could not open a connection to SQL Server [53].
Some considerations
If I provide an invalid username/password, the Data Source Manager does say that the username and password is incorrect.
Firewall is turned off in the SQL Server (either way, this error also happens if I try top use the Data Source Manager whilst logged in the SQL Server itself).
SQL Profiler does not show any attempt of connection.
The SQL server instance in question is the default one.
The error happens regardless if I select the option to encrypt connection or not.
In SQL Configuration manager I can see that all protocols are enabled (TCP/IP, Named Pipes and Shared Memory.
The Event Viewer does not provide any further errors than the one I have copied in this post.
I'm at a loss here. Could someone please advise what might I be doing wrong?
Regards,
P.

Here is what I had to do to solve this issue:
Basically I had to add the MSSQL TCP/IP port as an end-point in Azure. After I did that, then I was able to create the data-source. However, I was only able to authenticate with a SQL account, as any domain account would return me an error saying that the
domain isn't trusted.
What puzzles me here is how come the Data Source Manager would inform me that an account username/password was invalid, but it would fail/timeout if I provided valid credentials (!?!?!!?)

OLE DB or ODBC error: [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (Connect()).]SQL Server does not exist or access denied

Hi,
I have one client and one server. In both hosts I created an OS-user named User1.
The user have been given various role under the prefix SQLServer2005.
The default instance of SQL Server and instance (background-process) of
Analysis Service are also run under User1.
I connected via Management Studio to Analysis Service directly in the
server. I set the permission to access Analysis Service to Everyone.
This means everyone should be able to use Analysis Service. I have set
ODBC data source to the server. Testing was successful.
I created a project to create a cube. The tables are fairly small (total 300 MB, biggest one 290).
On project setting (created at client) I set the server host as
deployment target. I managed to deploy project when all I have are Data
Source and Data Source Views.
But on deployment I always failed. The errors remain the same, begins with
OLE DB error: OLE DB or ODBC error: [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (Connect()).]SQL Server does not exist or access denied.; 08001.
I have tried 4 combinations of Impersonation :
(A) Use a specific username and password
* in which I supply User1 and the password of User1
(B) Use the service account
(C) Use the credentials of the current user
(D) Default
Why is this? The server does certainly exist. I think the error message is wrong.
I have seen 3 posting that seems related. One of them say the solution is giving the right impersonation, but gave no detail. About the privilege, User1 are granted the role of
SQLServer2005MSOLAP. What is the solution?
Thank you,
Bernaridho

I just had this problem and solved it by creating an alias in SQL Server Configuration Manager, as below:
Scenario: My SQL server is accessible from the internet under my.domain.com, and from itself at ServerName. But the local network can't see itself through the router at my.domain.com, so the deployed project is unable to process the cube, since that would
require Analysis Services to be able to see the SQL Server at my.domain.com, which it can't do.
So I changed the server in my project from my.domain.com to ServerName, and I created a local alias to ServerName in SQL Server Configuration Manager, under SQL Native Client 11.0 Configuration, Aliases. In my case, I pointed it to localhost port 1333, and
used SSH -L 1333:my.domain.com:1433, but I could have pointed the alias directly to the server, just as well. (Verifying... yes, that worked too, so you can forget SSH if you have no interest in it.)

[DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (Connect()).]SQL Server does not exist or access denied.

I using SQL 2000 on Server 2012 in named instance. when i connect locally, it's ok, but when try to connect from network it generates error [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (Connect()).]SQL Server does not exist or access denied.

Hi Sayed Abdul Latif,
As other post, SQL Server 2000 was out of support since April,2013. You can try to install SQL Server 2005 or later version. In addition, since the issue regards SQL Server Data Access. I will help you post the question in the related forums. It is appropriate
and more experts will assist you.
According to your description, you can only connect to SQL Server locally, I recommend you check if the TCP/IP and Named Pipes are enabled in SQL Server Configuration Manager. And the SQL Server is set to allow remote connection. Then restart the SQL Service
and check if you can connect to SQL Server remotely.
Additionally, we also need to verify if the SQL Server named instance is in a cluster, and connect to it by using the "servername\instancename" syntax, then you receive the above error message. If yes, you have to hardcode the TCP port or the Named Pipe
of the SQL Server named instance. For more information, you can review the following article.http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888228/en-us
Thanks,
Sofiya Li
Sofiya Li
TechNet Community Support

Unity Connection 8.5 single inbox with Exchange 2003 - Access denied

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for