 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussionsAccessExcelInfoPathOutlookPowerPointPublisherWordDirectoryUser Groups Related Topics Outlook ExpressInternet ExplorerWindowsMS Server ProductsMore Topics ... |
MS Office Forum / Outlook / Contacts / March 2008Cheating the Contacts distribution list?
Currently using Outlook and Exchange 2007. As best practice when creating Contact based distribution lists you should try to keep less than 100 if you keep the contact's that were added detail to absolute minimum. So of course one of our High level execs wants to create a DL in his contacts with 800 SMTP addresses. So we created 8 separate DL groups with 100 persons in each group. Now, to cheat the normal error when more are added to a DL, can I create a single combined DL where each of those other 8 distribution lists are added within? We want to make this so he just has to send to one group but of course once sent it goes to all those subgroups. Does this work or will it also give an error regarding DL size, etc? Thanks!! > Currently using Outlook and Exchange 2007. As best practice when > creating Contact based distribution lists you should try to keep less [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > to one group but of course once sent it goes to all those subgroups. > Does this work or will it also give an error regarding DL size, etc? You should be able to nest DLs and avoid the problem.  SignatureBrian Tillman [MVP-Outlook] Thanks Brian...Just the answer I wished to hear! Have a great day! > > Currently using Outlook and Exchange 2007. As best practice when > > creating Contact based distribution lists you should try to keep less [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > You should be able to nest DLs and avoid the problem. Well I spoke to soon. Looks like this worked for all but one of the DL groups in the combined DL. Got this....None of your e-mail accounts could send to this recipient. Now what is interesting is out of 8 groups in that one this is the only one that generated that error.? > > Currently using Outlook and Exchange 2007. As best practice when > > creating Contact based distribution lists you should try to keep less [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > You should be able to nest DLs and avoid the problem. Did you check permissions? Does that DL work by itself? SignatureDiane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook] Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/ Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/ Outlook Tips by email: dailytips-subscribe-request@lists.outlooktips.net Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/ Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter: EMO-NEWSLETTER-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM ** Please include your Outlook version, Account type, and Windows Version when requesting assistance ** > Well I spoke to soon. Looks like this worked for all but one of the DL > groups in the combined DL. Got this....None of your e-mail accounts could [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> >> You should be able to nest DLs and avoid the problem. Actually Brian was correct. What hadf happened was the on DL that gave the error had two addresses set with "MAILTO:" before the SMTP. So it of course triggered an error. So for those that run into needing a Contact based distribution list with a ton of persons in it the embedding of smaller DL's into a single combined DL does work. Thanks to all who helped with this!! > Did you check permissions? Does that DL work by itself? > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >> > >> You should be able to nest DLs and avoid the problem.
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.