 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Server Forum / Exchange Server / Design / March 2008Exchange 2003 design for 2 sites
Can someone please give an advice about the design… We are a small organization with: • One main office with 50 users and • One branch office with 5 users. We have established site-to-site VPN between the two offices. Currently we have one Exchange 2003 server located at our main office. From time to time the Internet connection at our main office is down and our requirement is colleagues from the branch office to work continuously with the Public Folders. A decision was made to put another server (both Domain Controller and Exchange server) at the branch office on which we will have Public Folder replica. Also the mailboxes of the users that work in the branch office will be moved on the Exchange server located at their site. From the Active Directory perspective, we consider to have one Domain with two sites. Both Exchange servers will be in the same Exchange organization. What about routing groups? Should I put the servers in the same or in a different routing group? When the Internet connection at our main office is down, is there a way that the colleagues at the branch office continue to both receive and send e-mail? Thanks in advance, Stefan >Can someone please give an advice about the design
>We are a small organization with: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >Thanks in advance, >Stefan Sounds like an expensive way to handle a failure that has nothing to do with Exchange. Like buying a new car because you didn't like the wheels on the old one. One routing group. The branch server will still send to the Internet when the main office is unreachable. Talk to your ISP about having the branch office set up as a secondary MX record so that if your main is offline mail will come into the branch office and be either delivered to those users in the branch or queued up for those users who have mailboxes in the temporarily unreachable head office. I'd have to agree, that's a for 5 users. You might be better off clustering , or hot standby/disasterrevoery install/dialtone & restore from backup, in the main office and looking at redundat ISP connections. If you're going down the route you detailed, then one routing group. Do have your ISP set up redundant MX record for the second server (inbound). Do use an SMTP connector with both servers as bridgeheads (outbound). . >>Can someone please give an advice about the design. >>We are a small organization with: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > to those users in the branch or queued up for those users who have > mailboxes in the temporarily unreachable head office. Mark and John, You both were very helpful. Thanks a lot. Best regards, Stefan > I'd have to agree, that's a for 5 users. You might be better off clustering > , or hot standby/disasterrevoery install/dialtone & restore from backup, in [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > to those users in the branch or queued up for those users who have > > mailboxes in the temporarily unreachable head office. Is it possible to have redundant links. If one link goes down the other provides connecivity. This common where users are centralised in one location. > Mark and John, > [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > > to those users in the branch or queued up for those users who have > > > mailboxes in the temporarily unreachable head office. Redundant links are great, right up until you find that the telco has done the job on the cheap and you're piped into the same exchange. Or you go with a second telco who, because of the area, just contract all their work to the first telco who do the job and pipe it all into the same exchange again. I saw a bank do this in a call centre a while back. Three links, each leaving trhough a separate duct on separate sides of the building. Follow the ducts and they all ended up at the same BT junction box. Not clever and a staggering waste of money. Or the telcos merge .. It just takes some care selecting telcos for redundant links. > Redundant links are great, right up until you find that the telco has > done the job on the cheap and you're piped into the same exchange. Or [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Follow the ducts and they all ended up at the same BT junction box. > Not clever and a staggering waste of money. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.