[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debian to logon ms exchange server



on Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 01:09:02PM -0400, Adam Aube (aaube01@baker.edu) wrote:
> lunardancer wrote:
> 
> > I'm a new linux user, the first important thing I'm facing is, to access
> > company exchange server.  My company have a web access exchange, I paste
> > the IP http://xx.xx.xx.xx/exchange to mozilla and an authorization window
> > appear, but I cannot get access with my domain/user/passwd.  In windows
> > after I logon to the domain, all ok.
> 
> Sounds like the Exchange web access is set to only allow NTLM (aka Windows
> Integrated) authentication. You'll need to talk with your Exchange server
> admin and see if they will turn on Basic authentication for you.
> 
> If they won't, there is a program called NTLM Authorization Proxy Server
> (apserver.sourceforge.net) that may solve your problem. It converts basic
> authentication to NTLM for use with proxy/web servers that only support
> NTLM authentication.

I'm talking through my hat here, but three bits of possibly useful info:

  - winbind, part of Samba, is used in parts of GNU/Linux / legacy MS
    Windows authentication.  This might be of use here, though I think
    I'm off on this one.

  - AFAIK, there are only a limited subset of connection methods
    available for GNU/Linux <=> Exchange servers, without third-party
    add-ons.  That would be POP3 and _possibly_ IMAP support.  Again,
    I've got very little experience here.

  - There are third party add-on modules which provide full Exchange <=>
    GNU/Linux interoperability, as far as mail and messaging go.
    Calendars are still a black art.  Ximian Connector (now from Novell
    I suppose) and Samsung Contact (IIRC) are the two leaders.


Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
    How about outsourcing the Presidency?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: