We have a General Mailbox that is used to receive incoming general emails (info@abc.com). So date, the mailbox has only been access via WebMail. I'm working on setting things up where each person in the department has permissions to the account for assorted reasons. Since it is a General Mailbox and not tied to any person's WindowUserId, am I correct that I have to have our Exchange Administrator setup each person as a delegate on the account to enable the 'Sent on Behalf of XXXX' ? David H

If you want the send on behalf permission, then you can login as that shared mailbox (it will be tied to an account) and setup delegates within Outlook. Not sure which exch svr verion your using, you can also ask your exch admin to user EMS command - Set-Mailbox UserMailbox -GrantSendOnBehalfTo UserWhoSends Sukh

If you want the send on behalf permission, then you can login as that shared mailbox (it will be tied to an account) and setup delegates within Outlook. Not sure which exch svr verion your using, you can also ask your exch admin to user EMS command - Set-Mailbox UserMailbox -GrantSendOnBehalfTo UserWhoSends Sukh The general mailbox is setup rather funky. There's a AD group with each person as a member that is somehow setup so that when the person logs in via WebMail, their directed to the general mailbox. I only found this out this morning when I started chasing this rabbit. I did discover that this AD group had the inherent ability to open the General Mailbox from within Outlook. Its not exactly how I'd set it up, but that's just life. Question - Can a AD group be setup as a Delegate? Can a AD group be given permissions just like a regular user?David H

yes, those members should be abe to send on behalf.Sukh

yes, those members should be abe to send on behalf. Sukh Not certain if you understood the question. If there is an AD group named 'AD-GENERAL MAILBOX FULL ACCESS', can you execute Set-Mailbox UserMailbox -GrantSendOnBehalfTo AD-GENERAL MAILBOX FULL ACCESS When you go in to setup specific permissions on the folders, can you type into the dialbox 'AD-GENERAL MAILBOX FULL ACCESS' add the AD group as an AD group and then grant permissions? So that when you view the permissions box you don't see "David Smith, Joan Harper, Mike Jones, etc', but instead see 'AD-GENERAL MAILBOX FULL ACCESS'.David H

yes you can use a group for the folders and the set-mailboxSukh

Hello, You can also log in the general mailbox on Outlook and grant the permission to its Inbox folder. Remember the security group MUST be mail enabled! To grant "Send on Behalf Of" permissions to all users on a distribution list: 1. In Outlook, log on to the mailbox to which you want to give access. 2. On the Tools menu, click Options. 3. On the Delegates tab, click Add. 4. Click the distribution list to which you want to grant "Send on Behalf Of" permissions, click Add, and then click OK. 5. Choose the delegate permissions that you want, and then set Inbox to Author or Editor for "Send On Behalf Of" permissions. 6. Click OK, and then click OK. Thanks, Simon

When I send in the ticket, what type of group should I be asking for (Active Directory, Distribution List, etc.)?David H

Ask for a AD group but make sure it mail-enabled and it a security group Sukh

Hello, You can also log in the general mailbox on Outlook and grant the permission to its Inbox folder. Remember the security group MUST be mail enabled! To grant "Send on Behalf Of" permissions to all users on a distribution list: 1. In Outlook, log on to the mailbox to which you want to give access. 2. On the Tools menu, click Options. 3. On the Delegates tab, click Add. 4. Click the distribution list to which you want to grant "Send on Behalf Of" permissions, click Add, and then click OK. 5. Choose the delegate permissions that you want, and then set Inbox to Author or Editor for "Send On Behalf Of" permissions. 6. Click OK, and then click OK. Thanks, Simon I unmarked this as the 'answer' because our Outlook/Exchange implementation does not allow a user to login to another's mailbox using the Outlook full client. Hence, while it is technically correct, it does not apply to our scenario.David H