TCL error for a modified _sys_APM_activesync

Thanks Cory, I was guessing that, so to help narrow it down, 1st I pulled the iRules out 1 at a time starting with the least suspect (replacing them after a 5 - 10 min. with no log messages). When I pulled the one I suspected _sys_APM_ExchangeSupport_OA_BasicAuth, all seemed to work (I didn't get active sync authentication errors, or log errors) so I left it for a while longer until we noticed our phones were not receiving new mail. My next guess is that the problem lies here in the when HTTP_REQUEST . . when HTTP_REQUEST { set http_path [ string tolower [HTTP::path] ] set f_clientless_mode 0 set f_alt_inactivity_timeout 0 set f_rpc_over_http 0 set f_exchange_web_service 0 set f_auto_discover 0 set f_activesync 0 set f_offline_address_book 0 set f_availability_service 0

      Here put appropriate pool when necessary.
    switch -glob $http_path {
    "/rpc/rpcproxy.dll*" {
         Supports for RPC over HTTP. (Outlook Anywhere)
        set f_rpc_over_http 1
    }
    "/autodiscover/autodiscover.xml" {
         Supports for Auto Discover protocol.
        set f_auto_discover 1
         This request does not require long inactivity timeout.
         Don't use this for now
        set f_alt_inactivity_timeout 0
    }
    "/microsoft-server-activesync*" {
         Supports for ActiveSync
        set f_activesync 1
    }
    "/oab/*" {
         Supports for Offline Address Book
        set f_offline_address_book 1
         Don't use this for now
        set f_alt_inactivity_timeout 0
    }
    "/ews/*" {
         Support for Exchange Web Service
         Outlook's Availability Service borrows this protocol.
        set f_exchange_web_service 1
    }
    "/as/*" {
         Support for Availability Service.
         do nothing for now. (Untested)
        set f_availability_service 1
    }
    default {
        return
    }
    }

    Merging these might be a little out of my league. I have ideas to just have the set f_activesync 1 moved under the other iRule. I thought I would see what you, or others thought. It would seem like this would be a problem for many Exchange active sync users.
    Thanks,
    jkrum