Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Exchange 2007 does not have PF by default. I assume you have already created
the public folders.
Run command: Add-AvailabilityAddressSpace -ForestName _Google Domain_
-AccessMethod PublicFolder
Though this command is not related to write permission to PFs. Its only for
looking up PFs for free busy info.
If public folder server is different from CAS or Mailbox server then specify
Exchange.FreeBusyServerName parameter as mentioned in
http://code.google.com/p/google-calendar-connectors/wiki/SyncServiceGuide#4_Conf
iguring_the_Google_Calendar_Connector_Sync_Service
Try following options:
Remove SSL requirement on PF. To do this go to IIS. Right click and go to
properties of Public. Click on Directory Security tab. Edit Secure
Communications. Uncheck the "Require SSL" check box.
Enable Anonymous access. In the above Directory Security tab, edit
"Authentication and access control". Enable anonymous access check box.
Original comment by jaideepg...@gmail.com
on 10 Jan 2011 at 1:32
I tried all these options.. yes we have Pfs on 2007 mailbox servers. No matter
what i change I get two errors.. 404 not found or 403 forbidden. Fortunately i
had exchange 2003 still hanging around. I replicated free/busy store back to
2k3 and updated config to point to 2k3 and it works.. now i have question here:
We are doing pilot for IT dept. All the users have exchange mailboxes and
configured dual or single delivery to googleapps. Now if Non-Pilot user wants
to view free/busy of a pilot user which calender will be used.. exchange
calender or google calender? we have pilot users doing both... dual delivery
for some and only google delivery for some... Please let me know..
Original comment by asubhe...@jrn.com
on 11 Jan 2011 at 12:12
Also i Need one confirmation on below command
Run command: Add-AvailabilityAddressSpace -ForestName _Google Domain_
-AccessMethod PublicFolder
What is google domain here? what resource we need to mentioned there?
Original comment by asubhe...@jrn.com
on 11 Jan 2011 at 12:51
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
asubhe...@jrn.com
on 9 Jan 2011 at 6:25