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 / July 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Move from 2003 Std to 2003 Ent w/ Front/Backend Cluster

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
acoustix - 09 Jul 2006 22:10 GMT
I'm planning on moving from a single 2003 Exchange Server Standard (running
on a Win2000 server with SP4) to a 2003 Enterprise setup on multiple servers.
I plan to have 3 servers: 1 as the front end server running Windows Svr 2003
Ent & Exchange 2003 Ent.  The other two servers will be setup as an
active/passive backend server cluster, both running Win Svr 2003 Ent &
Exchange 2003 Ent.

I've been reading docs from Microsoft about implementing the
frontend/backend topology as well as the high availability docs dealing with
clustering.  I'll be purchasing two new servers that will serve as the
backend cluster.  I want to use the current exchange server as my new
frontend server.  I'm assuming that I'll have to move the current mailboxes
to a temporary server so I can reload and reconfigure the current exchange
server as a front end server.

I should also include that there are approximately 200 users that will
access the servers.  We also use our exchange server to hold our voicemails
from our Cisco IP phone system.  

Does anyone have any advice on how I should prepare for the move?  What
about the actual move?  Did anyone experience any problems that can be
avoided?  I would appreciate any advice out there.  Thanks!

Nick
Neil Hobson [MVP] - 10 Jul 2006 08:19 GMT
The 'move mailbox' method is definitely the way to go and it sounds like you
have a solid plan.

One observation: you've specified the Enterprise Edition of both Windows and
Exchange for the front-end server.  This isn't needed as the Standard
Edition will do here.  Saves a bit of cash.

Signature

Neil Hobson
Exchange MVP
http://www.msexchange.org/Neil_Hobson/

> I'm planning on moving from a single 2003 Exchange Server Standard
> (running
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>
> Nick
Mark Arnold [MVP] - 10 Jul 2006 08:34 GMT
>I'm planning on moving from a single 2003 Exchange Server Standard (running
>on a Win2000 server with SP4) to a 2003 Enterprise setup on multiple servers.
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
>Nick

FE/BE is the best plan but don't use Exchange or Windows Enterprise on
the FE. No need for it and damn expensive if you do.

As for migration, moving rhe MBs is way simpler, less risky and has
virtually zero user downtime.
acoustix - 10 Jul 2006 14:48 GMT
Thanks Mark & Neil.  I really appreciate it.  

Nick

> >I'm planning on moving from a single 2003 Exchange Server Standard (running
> >on a Win2000 server with SP4) to a 2003 Enterprise setup on multiple servers.
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> As for migration, moving rhe MBs is way simpler, less risky and has
> virtually zero user downtime.
mitch Roberson - 12 Jul 2006 16:55 GMT
Be careful if you have this tied into unity because unity looks only at the
one exchange server. You will have to work with your cisco people to be sure
it points to the correct server you are moving your mailboxes to. Cisco has
some good white papers on this and I believe just came out with some tools
to help make this happen.

> Thanks Mark & Neil.  I really appreciate it.
>
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>> As for migration, moving rhe MBs is way simpler, less risky and has
>> virtually zero user downtime.
 
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.