regsamp
asked on
Increasing sending/receiving sizes for e-mails to 20 MB
Some of the Company Managers are requesting to change the limit of the e-mails sent and received by our Exchange server from 10 MB to 20 MB. I warned about performance issues, hard drive space, time to restore, mailbox sizes, etc but they want it done. We have an Exchange 2003 Enterprise server and only have a T1. We have FTP so any files that are above 10 MB we usually just use this method but the Managers do not want to. I wanted to see how many people are sending/receiving 20 MB or above e-mail attachments and any issues they might have and how they overcome them?
...one more place you can set message size;
"first admin group (you may have to enable this in the "view", "servers", "name of your server", "protocols", "smtp", right click your virtual server, then click the "messages" tab.
J
"first admin group (you may have to enable this in the "view", "servers", "name of your server", "protocols", "smtp", right click your virtual server, then click the "messages" tab.
J
ASKER
Are there Organizations with a T1 line on an Exchange 2003 server that are sending 20 MB files on average? I would think that there would be corruption and performance issues so this is more or less a question of actual application of doing this?
...all day long. Most everyone I know is using at least a 20mb attachment rule, some in a university environment use 50mb.
are your using a standard version of exchange, if your are then keep in mind your edb file can't grow beyond 14GB... So that would really be your only defense to not implement a larger attachment policy. If you're using an enterprise version there's no reason why you shouldnt do this.
J
are your using a standard version of exchange, if your are then keep in mind your edb file can't grow beyond 14GB... So that would really be your only defense to not implement a larger attachment policy. If you're using an enterprise version there's no reason why you shouldnt do this.
J
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
We are using Exchange Enterprise 2003. Which colleges are using 50 MB files? The IT department of M.I.T limits their e-mail system to 10 MB. Wouldn't 50 MB files crash an Exchange server on a T1 line?
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Well, with OC12 being the line then I can see getting that kind of size. I was told MIT does not go over 10 MB on average according to a friend. When I say crashing a T1, I mean hanging up the line and other issues listed below. Are these not concerns of expanding the 10 MB limit?
"10MB is the standard limit for email attachments for good reason.
Large attachments bloat Inboxes
Make mailbox corruption more likely,
takes longer to backup and restore,
performs poorer on slower WAN links and via VPN,
takes longer to process through delivery queues,
and is *very likely to be denied by an outside mail server who has a lower attachment size limit*.
This means it costs the company more money in disk capacity on the Exchange server, backup time, backup disk/tape capacity, downtime to restore the large InfoStore in a server loss, and bandwidth costs to transfer that email.
Users should be using file servers (or at least workstation file shares) to transfer 10MB+ files to other employees and use an FTP site or similar service for external users."
"10MB is the standard limit for email attachments for good reason.
Large attachments bloat Inboxes
Make mailbox corruption more likely,
takes longer to backup and restore,
performs poorer on slower WAN links and via VPN,
takes longer to process through delivery queues,
and is *very likely to be denied by an outside mail server who has a lower attachment size limit*.
This means it costs the company more money in disk capacity on the Exchange server, backup time, backup disk/tape capacity, downtime to restore the large InfoStore in a server loss, and bandwidth costs to transfer that email.
Users should be using file servers (or at least workstation file shares) to transfer 10MB+ files to other employees and use an FTP site or similar service for external users."
..why don't you sell your managment on this then? keep in mind, you're supporting them, but you make a good argument. However, if they NEED to send large attachement, then that's what you have to do.
ASKER
True, if they need to send large attachments then might have to do it but I try to suggest that is what FTP is for. Well, some valid points, thank you.
with respect to knowing who is sending these large attachments you can use the "message tracking center" to determine who's sent what to where...