Hi all, I've been working all weekend on trying to get Outlook 2007 using Outlook Anywhere / RPC over HTTPS to Exchange 2007 to work using a sign-in page/policy/virtual hostname (aka reverse proxy). The reverse proxying works for OWA and Activesync just fine now but not for Outlook Anywhere. I see what look to be successful entries in the Juniper logs: 2009-07-04 14:53:40 - ive - [1.2.3.4] 1.2.3.4()[ActiveSync] - WebRequest completed, RPC_OUT_DATA to https://CASinternal.local:443//rpc/rpcproxy.dll?MBXinternal.local:6002 from 9.8.7.6 result=200 sent=76 received=1073741824 in 0 seconds 2009-07-04 14:53:40 - ive - [1.2.3.4] 1.2.3.4()[ActiveSync] - WebRequest ok : Host: CASinternal.local, Request: RPC_OUT_DATA /rpc/rpcproxy.dll?MBXinternal.local:6002 HTTP/1.1 2009-07-04 14:53:39 - ive - [1.2.3.4] 1.2.3.4()[ActiveSync] - WebRequest ok : Host: CASinternal.local, Request: RPC_IN_DATA /rpc/rpcproxy.dll?MBXinternal.local:6002 HTTP/1.1 Yet Outlook never connects successfully over HTTPS. I've done all the Outlook Anywhere internal tests and it looks to be working fine; just not through the Juniper. Has anyone else gotten this to work? Is there an issue with the Juniper reverse proxying RPC over HTTPS that anyone is aware of? Thanks in advance. Z ... View more

I've setup an authentication only activesync sign-in policy. Everything works but there is something I don't understand. It works because in the backend url field I put our currently external-facing OWA server URL. However, I'm planning on using this for our upcoming Exchange 2007 deployment which requires the CAS role (i.e. OWA) to be internal. I was hoping to use the Juniper to reverse proxy the requests. However, my understanding of the way Juniper handles it is that it simply send the calling web browser the backend URL. In other words, the user enters a URL that matches the hostname set in the sign-in policy, then the juniper replaces that with the backend url. The problem here is that the backend URL must be publicly accessible, no? If that's the case it totally defeats the purpose of having the reverse proxy as you can't have your backend url be an interal address, right? What am I missing? ... View more

I'm seeing this in my log for a particular user: 2009-05-08 08:46:15 - ive - Closed connection to TUN-VPN port 443 after 727 seconds, with 3033 bytes read (in 18 chunks) and 1688 bytes written (in 15 chunks) 2009-05-08 08:26:51 - ive - Closed connection to TUN-VPN port 443 after 2388 seconds, with 10869 bytes read (in 55 chunks) and 13042 bytes written (in 55 chunks) 2009-05-08 07:45:20 - ive - Closed connection to TUN-VPN port 443 after 2409 seconds, with 13869 bytes read (in 97 chunks) and 9456 bytes written (in 57 chunks) The user says that after he is disconnected he has to actually restart his computer because his network connectivity is hosed. I've searched for information on this log entry without luck. Anyone know what would cause this connection to close on its own? ... View more

I'm investigating the newest ESAP file and saw this in the release notes under "Known Issues/Limitations NOT Fixed in ESAP 1.4.1:" 3. MS FW - XP SP2+ not getting detected (385891) Am I to understand that they're saying the default firewall in Windows XP sp2 is not properly detected? Seriously? How could they release this? My experience so far has been less than stellar with this product. Between there STILL not being support for FF3, poor McAFee HIPS detection, and being unable to detect the default firewall for XP (and Vista at one point), I'm very disapointed. I honestly do not feel I can use the host checker in a production environment. What am I missing? Are others using it successfully? ... View more

I'm having some users that are unable to resolve internal machine names without using the FQDN (using network connect). For example, ping mymachine does not resolve to mymachine.mycompany.com, but if you ping mymachine.mycompany.com, it resolves fine. With most users the name resolves fine. I can log in on a machine that isn't resolving correctly, and it will then resolve correctly. Has anyone seen this? - I do have the domain name listed in the DNS Domain's field - It does work for MOST users, there are only a few that don't (working and non-working users have the same roles/permissions) - This has happened on R6.0 and 6.2, and network connect 6.0 and 6.2 Any thoughts? ... View more