Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsWindows Server 2003Windows 2000Windows NTSmall Business ServerVirtual ServerExchange ServerIISHost Integration ServerISA ServerSMSWSUSMOMWindows Media ServerSecurityCertification
Related Topics
SQL ServerMS WindowsMS OfficePC HardwareMore Topics ...

Windows Server Forum / Exchange Server / Design / October 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Failover Exchange Servers

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
shorsley@shorsley.com - 13 Oct 2005 22:08 GMT
If I have an Exchange 2000/2003 server located at a colo and another
Exchange Server 2000/2003 server located in my building, can Exchange
be configured so that any email that comes to my company, would hit the
first server and then forward a copy to the Exchange server that is
sitting in my building?  The users would have their default be the
Exchange Server at the building but if something were to go happen,
power outage etc, I could change their setting to point to the Exchange
server that is located at the colo and they could continue running with
access to all their email, etc?

I know there are other fault tolerant setup such as clustering etc but
some companies can't afford it.

And this is a company that provides some sort of technology for
Exchange and so when customers come in, they will see the compnay using
exchange with the product they sell.

Any information would be appreciated.
Brian Desmond [MVP] - 14 Oct 2005 04:03 GMT
Replied in m.p.exchange.admin. Please don't multipost.

Signature

Thanks,
Brian Desmond
Windows Server MVP

www.briandesmond.com

> If I have an Exchange 2000/2003 server located at a colo and another
> Exchange Server 2000/2003 server located in my building, can Exchange
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Any information would be appreciated.
David L. West - 14 Oct 2005 07:08 GMT
Echoing Brian, I think clustering would be the only to get exactly this  
functionality.

Making the assumption that the colo would have much better redundancy as  
far as power and net infrastructure are concerned, why have a local  
Exchane server at all?

Put *both* servers in the colo and run the clients in cached mode. Backup  
the first server to the second at whatever interval makes sense, and have  
a procedure in place to bring up the second if the first takes a dive.

Signature

David L. West
http://www.deskoptional.com

 
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.