Email going to own servers?

lolage

lolage

lolage

fiveub's Slave
Associate
Joined
1 Sep 2007
Posts
1,461
Location
OcUK HQ
Hi

Basically my aunties company wanted a website doing and asked if I was able. I said yes, agreed to do it. Was also asked if I could setup emails etc which I said yes to as I've done this before.

After meeting her boss it turns out that they currently have emails from their current supplier, but the emails go to their own server which then get passed through to the computers.

Anyone got any idea as to what I need to do for this?

Thanks!
 
Sounds like they have their own internal email "server". I've come across it. Usually you just need a catchall address, give the internal server the right incoming and outgoing server addresses and it'll do the rest. It's a bit of an old legacy thing usually. Set up because an ISP didn't provide enough individual addresses. Or so an admin could add addresses without resorting to the ISP. Nowadays it makes little sense to me for a small office.
 
I'm not sure I follow. It sounds like you're describing a fairly common setup where e-mail is routed directly to an e-mail server using an MX record.
 
I don't understand why small companies are been ripped off with getting exchange installed for under 5 staff. I already been to 4 companies with 5 staff and less with a local exchange server installed. Pretty crazy and I bet they were charged an arm and a leg.
 
Probably not MS Exchange to be honest. If it's anything like the ones I've across, they just collect all of the email via a catchall then distribute it to different addresses via internal IP.
 
mrbell1984 said:
I don't understand why small companies are been ripped off with getting exchange installed for under 5 staff. I already been to 4 companies with 5 staff and less with a local exchange server installed. Pretty crazy and I bet they were charged an arm and a leg.
Click to expand...

Nothing in the OP indicated the company is small, other than the fact they don't seem to have their own IT support I guess.

I agree though, Exchange for 5 users is daft. We often spec SBS for SMB's though(unortunately:p) and I can see why it appeals.
 
Last edited:
mrbell1984 said:
I don't understand why small companies are been ripped off with getting exchange installed for under 5 staff. I already been to 4 companies with 5 staff and less with a local exchange server installed. Pretty crazy and I bet they were charged an arm and a leg.
Click to expand...

There's a million and one reasons why SMB's have rolled out their own. But granted, now that you can pick up hosted Exchange accounts for very little money, it would be a little pointless going down the own Exchange box route unless there were some specific reasons.

lolage - You're going to need to do some digging and determine exactly what's what and then take it from there.
 
A product that violates pretty much every best practise guide set by the people who produce it isn't indicative of a quality piece of software. Also as has been previously mentioned it encourages on-site Exchange servers in situations where they really shouldn't exist while also storing up huge problems in the future in terms of costs to migrate away to something that isn't terrible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom