locked
new user receiving reply to old users email - x.500? RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi,

    We have the following situation in our Exchange 2007 environment that I'm hoping somebody can help with:-

    #A user (Andrew Hughes) left the organisation some time ago and their account was deleted.

    #A new (Anthony Hughes) joined the organisation

    #The old and new users have the same alias (ahughes)

    #When live users reply to old email sent from or containing the old user in the reply to list, the new user receives the email

    Would this be due to the Exchange Auto-Complete Cache using the x.500 address? 

    If an Exchange genius would be able to explain why this is happening and how it might be stopped that would be great!

    Thanks in advance.

    Andrew

    Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:37 PM

Answers

  • Sounds like it is probably the legacyExchangeDN value. 

    The only way I can think to stop it is to change the value for Anthony Hughes.  The problem with that is replies to emails Anthony has already sent will be non-delivered. 


    Tony www.activedir.org blog:www.open-a-socket.com

    • Marked as answer by Castinlu Tuesday, July 3, 2012 3:31 AM
    Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:07 PM
  • hi,

    >>>Would this be due to the Exchange Auto-Complete Cache using the x.500 address?

    First answer you question, the answer is no. I meet the situation, and only when i empty the cache, then i can send mail to the live user.

    I also do a test. I can't receive the message that user reply the old one.

    So i recommend that you should delete the user again, make sure you really delete it. Then create again.

    hope can help you

    thanks,


    CastinLu

    TechNet Community Support


    • Edited by Castinlu Thursday, June 28, 2012 8:56 AM
    • Marked as answer by Castinlu Tuesday, July 3, 2012 3:31 AM
    Thursday, June 28, 2012 8:55 AM

All replies

  • Sounds like it is probably the legacyExchangeDN value. 

    The only way I can think to stop it is to change the value for Anthony Hughes.  The problem with that is replies to emails Anthony has already sent will be non-delivered. 


    Tony www.activedir.org blog:www.open-a-socket.com

    • Marked as answer by Castinlu Tuesday, July 3, 2012 3:31 AM
    Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:07 PM
  • Hi Tony,

    So the old mailbox had an x.500 address o=Example/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=ahughes. This mailbox was deleted. The new user was created with the same x.500 address. The x.500 address is used internally so replies to email sent from the old mailbox are being delivered to the new mailbox as the x.500 addresses match.We could change the x.500 address of the new user which would resolve the issue of them receiving replies to the old users email but, on the other hand, this would result in the new mailbox not receiving replies to any email previouly sent from the mailbox. Is this correct?

    Thanks for you help :-)

    Thursday, June 28, 2012 8:06 AM
  • hi,

    >>>Would this be due to the Exchange Auto-Complete Cache using the x.500 address?

    First answer you question, the answer is no. I meet the situation, and only when i empty the cache, then i can send mail to the live user.

    I also do a test. I can't receive the message that user reply the old one.

    So i recommend that you should delete the user again, make sure you really delete it. Then create again.

    hope can help you

    thanks,


    CastinLu

    TechNet Community Support


    • Edited by Castinlu Thursday, June 28, 2012 8:56 AM
    • Marked as answer by Castinlu Tuesday, July 3, 2012 3:31 AM
    Thursday, June 28, 2012 8:55 AM
  • Mostly correct, except the legacyExchangeDN (e.g. o=Example/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=ahughes) is an attribute on the user object separate to the proxyAddresses multivalued attribute where addresses (including SMTP, X400, X500, GWISE, etc.) are defined.

    It is unusual (but not impossible) to see a conflct with legacyExchangeDN.

    Someone else might come up with a better solution, but I don't see any other option other than the one I suggested previously.


    Tony www.activedir.org blog:www.open-a-socket.com

    Thursday, June 28, 2012 7:47 PM