| Author |
Message |
Hakan Aysan
Guest
|
 Posted:
Mon Oct 18, 2004 3:48 pm Post subject:
Exchange 5.5 Site Design Question |
|
|
Hello,
We are currently a single NT4.0 domain with a single Exchange 5.5 server in
one location. We now have a new office in a separate location connected via
a LAN-to-LAN VPN. The reliability is good (perhaps a minute of downtime or
slow performance every day), the latency is about 20ms and the bandwith
available around 1Mbit. The new office will have around 30 people.
Currently, people run Outlook directly over the VPN link to connect to the
Exchange server at out HQ. This works, but the performance is a little
slower than on a LAN of course due to the latency, especially when doing
searches and accessing existing stored mail. What we are aiming to do is to
install a second Exchange 5.5 server at the new site to minimise the
performance overhead by moving the mailboxes of users based in the new
office.
My question is, does it make sense to keep both of these servers as one
site, which seems simplest and easiest? Or would we have to use two sites
and the Exchange Site Connector? Really, my question is can it ever make
sense to have two Exchange servers in one site but across a WAN connection
(albeit a fast and secure one). My worry is that without a site connector,
the two servers will require LAN level network performance and reliability
for direct RPC communication, and that any issues will cause serious errors,
since a WAN link can never be the same as a LAN link of course.
Any info appreciated.
Regards,
Hakan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jim Schwartz
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:46 am Post subject:
Re: Exchange 5.5 Site Design Question |
|
|
Usually you would want to add a site for any WAN connected servers. I've
seen servers in the same site connected by WAN, but usually there is some
redundant connectivity and fat pipes. 5.5 tends to be a chatty animal.
Since 5.5 is going out of support at the end of this year, you should plan
on moving to Exchange 2000/2003 soon.
You didn't say what client version you were using, but I would move to
2000/2003 and then evaluate the performance of these clients. After that if
you need to you could add a server in that site if still required.
"Hakan Aysan" <hakan.aysan@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:eD1CDAQtEHA.1400@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Hello,
We are currently a single NT4.0 domain with a single Exchange 5.5 server
in
one location. We now have a new office in a separate location connected
via
a LAN-to-LAN VPN. The reliability is good (perhaps a minute of downtime or
slow performance every day), the latency is about 20ms and the bandwith
available around 1Mbit. The new office will have around 30 people.
Currently, people run Outlook directly over the VPN link to connect to the
Exchange server at out HQ. This works, but the performance is a little
slower than on a LAN of course due to the latency, especially when doing
searches and accessing existing stored mail. What we are aiming to do is
to
install a second Exchange 5.5 server at the new site to minimise the
performance overhead by moving the mailboxes of users based in the new
office.
My question is, does it make sense to keep both of these servers as one
site, which seems simplest and easiest? Or would we have to use two sites
and the Exchange Site Connector? Really, my question is can it ever make
sense to have two Exchange servers in one site but across a WAN connection
(albeit a fast and secure one). My worry is that without a site connector,
the two servers will require LAN level network performance and reliability
for direct RPC communication, and that any issues will cause serious
errors,
since a WAN link can never be the same as a LAN link of course.
Any info appreciated.
Regards,
Hakan
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hakan Aysan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:49 pm Post subject:
Re: Exchange 5.5 Site Design Question |
|
|
Thanks for the info, it's really appreciated. We are planning to move away
from Exchange 5.5 at some point, but for now it works fine so we were
reluctanct to change something that works before its time.
We are using Outlook 2000 clients, slowly moving to Outlook 2003. The
performance is not bad across the VPN, but as I would expect.
In terms of connecting Exchange servers across a WAN in the same site, I
note your general advice. Our connection is fairly quick with low latency.
If we do place servers in the same site, do you have any idea of bandwidth
requirements? Crucially, will any drops in the connection actually lead to
data integrity errors? I'm just trying to get an idea of what traffic would
be passed over apart from message traffic.
If anyone has any experience of running Exchange servers in the same site
across a fast WAN link, either positive or negative, I sure would be
interested in hearing it.
Thanks again,
Hakan
"Jim Schwartz" <shamusnc@notat.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:0BYcd.728$ta5.220@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
| Quote: | Usually you would want to add a site for any WAN connected servers. I've
seen servers in the same site connected by WAN, but usually there is some
redundant connectivity and fat pipes. 5.5 tends to be a chatty animal.
Since 5.5 is going out of support at the end of this year, you should plan
on moving to Exchange 2000/2003 soon.
You didn't say what client version you were using, but I would move to
2000/2003 and then evaluate the performance of these clients. After that
if
you need to you could add a server in that site if still required.
"Hakan Aysan" <hakan.aysan@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:eD1CDAQtEHA.1400@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
Hello,
We are currently a single NT4.0 domain with a single Exchange 5.5 server
in
one location. We now have a new office in a separate location connected
via
a LAN-to-LAN VPN. The reliability is good (perhaps a minute of downtime
or
slow performance every day), the latency is about 20ms and the bandwith
available around 1Mbit. The new office will have around 30 people.
Currently, people run Outlook directly over the VPN link to connect to
the
Exchange server at out HQ. This works, but the performance is a little
slower than on a LAN of course due to the latency, especially when doing
searches and accessing existing stored mail. What we are aiming to do is
to
install a second Exchange 5.5 server at the new site to minimise the
performance overhead by moving the mailboxes of users based in the new
office.
My question is, does it make sense to keep both of these servers as one
site, which seems simplest and easiest? Or would we have to use two sites
and the Exchange Site Connector? Really, my question is can it ever make
sense to have two Exchange servers in one site but across a WAN
connection
(albeit a fast and secure one). My worry is that without a site
connector,
the two servers will require LAN level network performance and
reliability
for direct RPC communication, and that any issues will cause serious
errors,
since a WAN link can never be the same as a LAN link of course.
Any info appreciated.
Regards,
Hakan
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Al Mulnick
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: Exchange 5.5 Site Design Question |
|
|
I've done it. Not too bad. But consider this:
Exchange 5.5 uses sites to define high-speed connection and administrator
boundaries. By putting a WAN in the middle, you have absolutely no control
over the bandwidth used. Exchange 5.x expects a hub to connect to the two,
so it won't be friendly about it. As for what the expected traffic is, that
is totally dependent on you and your organization. The way it gets used,
i.e. the amount of changes made, public folders, etc. Message sizes will
also impact and again you give up all control over bandwidth when you put it
in the same site.
Can be done though. And if your WAN link is as good as a network connection,
you'll get as good performance as if they were on the same high-speed
network. As for data loss, that *shouldn't* happen since it uses RPC/TCP to
transmit the data.
Just curious, but when you say before its time, do you mean before the end
of this year? That's when Exchange 5.5 SP4 support ends last I checked.
Good luck,
Al
"Hakan Aysan" <hakan.aysan@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:uPb%23ZlctEHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Thanks for the info, it's really appreciated. We are planning to move away
from Exchange 5.5 at some point, but for now it works fine so we were
reluctanct to change something that works before its time.
We are using Outlook 2000 clients, slowly moving to Outlook 2003. The
performance is not bad across the VPN, but as I would expect.
In terms of connecting Exchange servers across a WAN in the same site, I
note your general advice. Our connection is fairly quick with low latency.
If we do place servers in the same site, do you have any idea of bandwidth
requirements? Crucially, will any drops in the connection actually lead to
data integrity errors? I'm just trying to get an idea of what traffic
would be passed over apart from message traffic.
If anyone has any experience of running Exchange servers in the same site
across a fast WAN link, either positive or negative, I sure would be
interested in hearing it.
Thanks again,
Hakan
"Jim Schwartz" <shamusnc@notat.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:0BYcd.728$ta5.220@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Usually you would want to add a site for any WAN connected servers. I've
seen servers in the same site connected by WAN, but usually there is some
redundant connectivity and fat pipes. 5.5 tends to be a chatty animal.
Since 5.5 is going out of support at the end of this year, you should
plan
on moving to Exchange 2000/2003 soon.
You didn't say what client version you were using, but I would move to
2000/2003 and then evaluate the performance of these clients. After that
if
you need to you could add a server in that site if still required.
"Hakan Aysan" <hakan.aysan@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:eD1CDAQtEHA.1400@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
Hello,
We are currently a single NT4.0 domain with a single Exchange 5.5 server
in
one location. We now have a new office in a separate location connected
via
a LAN-to-LAN VPN. The reliability is good (perhaps a minute of downtime
or
slow performance every day), the latency is about 20ms and the bandwith
available around 1Mbit. The new office will have around 30 people.
Currently, people run Outlook directly over the VPN link to connect to
the
Exchange server at out HQ. This works, but the performance is a little
slower than on a LAN of course due to the latency, especially when doing
searches and accessing existing stored mail. What we are aiming to do is
to
install a second Exchange 5.5 server at the new site to minimise the
performance overhead by moving the mailboxes of users based in the new
office.
My question is, does it make sense to keep both of these servers as one
site, which seems simplest and easiest? Or would we have to use two
sites
and the Exchange Site Connector? Really, my question is can it ever make
sense to have two Exchange servers in one site but across a WAN
connection
(albeit a fast and secure one). My worry is that without a site
connector,
the two servers will require LAN level network performance and
reliability
for direct RPC communication, and that any issues will cause serious
errors,
since a WAN link can never be the same as a LAN link of course.
Any info appreciated.
Regards,
Hakan
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hakan Aysan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:35 pm Post subject:
Re: Exchange 5.5 Site Design Question |
|
|
Thanks all for the advice. I have since found a great article which could be
useful for others considering this topic:
http://www.winnetmag.com/Windows/Article/ArticleID/5587/5587.html
I guess we will upgrade to Exchange 2003 before the end of the year. My
feeling is just that Exchange 5.5 works great for many companies, so it's a
shame to replace it just becuase support has been pulled, especially since
the upgrade also means an upgrade to AD. I wouldn't be surprised if Exchange
support is extended though...
"Al Mulnick" <amulnick_No_SPAM@ncDOTrr.com> wrote in message
news:eSlAp1jtEHA.3200@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | I've done it. Not too bad. But consider this:
Exchange 5.5 uses sites to define high-speed connection and administrator
boundaries. By putting a WAN in the middle, you have absolutely no
control over the bandwidth used. Exchange 5.x expects a hub to connect to
the two, so it won't be friendly about it. As for what the expected
traffic is, that is totally dependent on you and your organization. The
way it gets used, i.e. the amount of changes made, public folders, etc.
Message sizes will also impact and again you give up all control over
bandwidth when you put it in the same site.
Can be done though. And if your WAN link is as good as a network
connection, you'll get as good performance as if they were on the same
high-speed network. As for data loss, that *shouldn't* happen since it
uses RPC/TCP to transmit the data.
Just curious, but when you say before its time, do you mean before the end
of this year? That's when Exchange 5.5 SP4 support ends last I checked.
Good luck,
Al
"Hakan Aysan" <hakan.aysan@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:uPb%23ZlctEHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
Thanks for the info, it's really appreciated. We are planning to move
away from Exchange 5.5 at some point, but for now it works fine so we
were reluctanct to change something that works before its time.
We are using Outlook 2000 clients, slowly moving to Outlook 2003. The
performance is not bad across the VPN, but as I would expect.
In terms of connecting Exchange servers across a WAN in the same site, I
note your general advice. Our connection is fairly quick with low
latency. If we do place servers in the same site, do you have any idea of
bandwidth requirements? Crucially, will any drops in the connection
actually lead to data integrity errors? I'm just trying to get an idea of
what traffic would be passed over apart from message traffic.
If anyone has any experience of running Exchange servers in the same site
across a fast WAN link, either positive or negative, I sure would be
interested in hearing it.
Thanks again,
Hakan
"Jim Schwartz" <shamusnc@notat.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:0BYcd.728$ta5.220@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Usually you would want to add a site for any WAN connected servers. I've
seen servers in the same site connected by WAN, but usually there is
some
redundant connectivity and fat pipes. 5.5 tends to be a chatty animal.
Since 5.5 is going out of support at the end of this year, you should
plan
on moving to Exchange 2000/2003 soon.
You didn't say what client version you were using, but I would move to
2000/2003 and then evaluate the performance of these clients. After that
if
you need to you could add a server in that site if still required.
"Hakan Aysan" <hakan.aysan@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:eD1CDAQtEHA.1400@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
Hello,
We are currently a single NT4.0 domain with a single Exchange 5.5
server
in
one location. We now have a new office in a separate location connected
via
a LAN-to-LAN VPN. The reliability is good (perhaps a minute of downtime
or
slow performance every day), the latency is about 20ms and the bandwith
available around 1Mbit. The new office will have around 30 people.
Currently, people run Outlook directly over the VPN link to connect to
the
Exchange server at out HQ. This works, but the performance is a little
slower than on a LAN of course due to the latency, especially when
doing
searches and accessing existing stored mail. What we are aiming to do
is
to
install a second Exchange 5.5 server at the new site to minimise the
performance overhead by moving the mailboxes of users based in the new
office.
My question is, does it make sense to keep both of these servers as one
site, which seems simplest and easiest? Or would we have to use two
sites
and the Exchange Site Connector? Really, my question is can it ever
make
sense to have two Exchange servers in one site but across a WAN
connection
(albeit a fast and secure one). My worry is that without a site
connector,
the two servers will require LAN level network performance and
reliability
for direct RPC communication, and that any issues will cause serious
errors,
since a WAN link can never be the same as a LAN link of course.
Any info appreciated.
Regards,
Hakan
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Al Mulnick
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:59 pm Post subject:
Re: Exchange 5.5 Site Design Question |
|
|
I would be floored if they extended support yet again.
Either way, good luck with the upgrade.
Al
"Hakan Aysan" <hakan.aysan@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:uQr3FCptEHA.3604@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Thanks all for the advice. I have since found a great article which could
be useful for others considering this topic:
http://www.winnetmag.com/Windows/Article/ArticleID/5587/5587.html
I guess we will upgrade to Exchange 2003 before the end of the year. My
feeling is just that Exchange 5.5 works great for many companies, so it's
a shame to replace it just becuase support has been pulled, especially
since the upgrade also means an upgrade to AD. I wouldn't be surprised if
Exchange support is extended though...
"Al Mulnick" <amulnick_No_SPAM@ncDOTrr.com> wrote in message
news:eSlAp1jtEHA.3200@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
I've done it. Not too bad. But consider this:
Exchange 5.5 uses sites to define high-speed connection and administrator
boundaries. By putting a WAN in the middle, you have absolutely no
control over the bandwidth used. Exchange 5.x expects a hub to connect
to the two, so it won't be friendly about it. As for what the expected
traffic is, that is totally dependent on you and your organization. The
way it gets used, i.e. the amount of changes made, public folders, etc.
Message sizes will also impact and again you give up all control over
bandwidth when you put it in the same site.
Can be done though. And if your WAN link is as good as a network
connection, you'll get as good performance as if they were on the same
high-speed network. As for data loss, that *shouldn't* happen since it
uses RPC/TCP to transmit the data.
Just curious, but when you say before its time, do you mean before the
end of this year? That's when Exchange 5.5 SP4 support ends last I
checked.
Good luck,
Al
"Hakan Aysan" <hakan.aysan@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:uPb%23ZlctEHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
Thanks for the info, it's really appreciated. We are planning to move
away from Exchange 5.5 at some point, but for now it works fine so we
were reluctanct to change something that works before its time.
We are using Outlook 2000 clients, slowly moving to Outlook 2003. The
performance is not bad across the VPN, but as I would expect.
In terms of connecting Exchange servers across a WAN in the same site, I
note your general advice. Our connection is fairly quick with low
latency. If we do place servers in the same site, do you have any idea
of bandwidth requirements? Crucially, will any drops in the connection
actually lead to data integrity errors? I'm just trying to get an idea
of what traffic would be passed over apart from message traffic.
If anyone has any experience of running Exchange servers in the same
site across a fast WAN link, either positive or negative, I sure would
be interested in hearing it.
Thanks again,
Hakan
"Jim Schwartz" <shamusnc@notat.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:0BYcd.728$ta5.220@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Usually you would want to add a site for any WAN connected servers.
I've
seen servers in the same site connected by WAN, but usually there is
some
redundant connectivity and fat pipes. 5.5 tends to be a chatty animal.
Since 5.5 is going out of support at the end of this year, you should
plan
on moving to Exchange 2000/2003 soon.
You didn't say what client version you were using, but I would move to
2000/2003 and then evaluate the performance of these clients. After
that if
you need to you could add a server in that site if still required.
"Hakan Aysan" <hakan.aysan@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:eD1CDAQtEHA.1400@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
Hello,
We are currently a single NT4.0 domain with a single Exchange 5.5
server
in
one location. We now have a new office in a separate location
connected
via
a LAN-to-LAN VPN. The reliability is good (perhaps a minute of
downtime or
slow performance every day), the latency is about 20ms and the
bandwith
available around 1Mbit. The new office will have around 30 people.
Currently, people run Outlook directly over the VPN link to connect to
the
Exchange server at out HQ. This works, but the performance is a little
slower than on a LAN of course due to the latency, especially when
doing
searches and accessing existing stored mail. What we are aiming to do
is
to
install a second Exchange 5.5 server at the new site to minimise the
performance overhead by moving the mailboxes of users based in the new
office.
My question is, does it make sense to keep both of these servers as
one
site, which seems simplest and easiest? Or would we have to use two
sites
and the Exchange Site Connector? Really, my question is can it ever
make
sense to have two Exchange servers in one site but across a WAN
connection
(albeit a fast and secure one). My worry is that without a site
connector,
the two servers will require LAN level network performance and
reliability
for direct RPC communication, and that any issues will cause serious
errors,
since a WAN link can never be the same as a LAN link of course.
Any info appreciated.
Regards,
Hakan
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in