A centralised v decentralised Exchange model largely depends on network
bandwidth, network utilisation and probably the biggest factor, network
latency.
Remote users will normally generate between 3 - 5 kbps, Outlook cached mode
can alleviate this as it can reduce the number of bytes on the wire by
between 25% - 50% percent depending on the traffic being sent. i.e. a word
document or excel spreadsheet will compress more than a jpg or a zip file.
Also there are certain things that cached mode cannot help with, have a look
at the Practices to avoid when you use Outlook 2003 with Cached Exchange
Mode section in
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;870926. Also take a
look at http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/assistance/HA011402591033.aspx
When you say each political unti could administer their own set of
mailboxes, do you mean Exchange servers ?
Regards
Paul Ford
Edge IT Ltd
> Can someone point me to some resources for the Exchange Distributed
> Authority model?
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Thanks,
> Mike
Michael Deering - 29 Nov 2005 12:12 GMT
Thak you Paul,
What I mean by each political unit administering their own set of mailboxes
is that we have multiple departments, each with varying needs. Each of those
would maintain it's own set of mailboxes, OU style, which are housed on a
fixed set of Exchange servers. Another consideration is to have a server
located in each region.
Unfortunately, Microsoft seems to neglect this model rather severly. They
just brush past it as a note. With no real solid documentation.
Thanks,
Mike
> A centralised v decentralised Exchange model largely depends on network
> bandwidth, network utilisation and probably the biggest factor, network
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>> Thanks,
>> Mike
Paul Ford - 30 Nov 2005 09:25 GMT
So a single Exchange server could house several departments mailboxes which
need to be administered by each department individually ?
Paul
> Thak you Paul,
>
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mike