| Author |
Message |
Tony Scarola
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Aug 03, 2005 4:59 pm Post subject:
Exchange 5.5 to 2003, Multiple Forests, Other Questions |
|
|
Hello!
I am currently researching the options for migrating from Exchange 5.5 to
2003. We have 2003 Active Directory domain as well as 2000 Active Directory
domain (two forests) with trust relationships between. We currently have one
Exchange 5.5 server in the 2003 AD domain with mailboxes for users on both
domains.
I would like to use the "standard deployment method" but in order to do so,
I see that I might need to first migrate the 2000 AD forest into the 2003 AD
forest to become single forest first. Is this true?
A few other questions:
If I start the "standard deployment method" [first] by installing E2K3 on
new hardware, setting up the ADC for the primary (2003) AD domain and moving
some of the mailboxes, can I keep the 5.5 server in place for the other
(2000) AD domain until that domain is merged within the primary forest?
Within our primary (2003) AD forest, we have two Exchange 5.5 sites, each
with it's own 5.5 server. We are connected to the remote site via T1 (1.544
Mbps) and support less than 100 desktops there. If I upgrade all the clients
to Outlook 2003 first, with the new "thin" lower-bandwidth requirement allow
me to consolidate both servers into one new E2K3 server - without the remote
users complaining about email slowdowns?
Thank you in advance!
Tony
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tony Scarola
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:59 pm Post subject:
Re: Exchange 5.5 to 2003, Multiple Forests, Other Questions |
|
|
Thank you Al.
"Al Mulnick" <amulnick_No_SPAM@ncDOTrr.com> wrote in message
news:e235U2OmFHA.3568@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | I would like to use the "standard deployment method" but in order to do so,
I see that I might need to first migrate the 2000 AD forest into the 2003
AD
forest to become single forest first. Is this true?
No, you don't "have" to migrate the users. It wouldn't be a bad idea, but
you don't have to. See the http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/library
deployment docs for the multi-forest scenarios. Yours would be a
two-forest scenario with one forest hosting the Exchange org.
It's better to use a single forest and much less complex, but it's not a
requirement.
You can leave the existing 5.5 server, ADC, and Exchange 2003 up as long
as it takes to migrate. It adds complexity and therefore risk, but it
works just fine.
Bandwidth friendly? Hmm... I suppose that depends on how you use it
doesn't it? T-1? That doesn't mean a lot to me because I can't tell how
much available bandwidth, latency, other apps, usage patterns, etc. I
also can't tell how the users will use Outlook to really make that
judgement call or if they'll all be online at the same time getting the
same mail and still expect decent performance (whatever decent turns out
to be).
You'll need to research more to find out if you can deploy that way.
Al
"Tony Scarola" <tony.scarola@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23C0fTnDmFHA.3120@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
Hello!
I am currently researching the options for migrating from Exchange 5.5 to
2003. We have 2003 Active Directory domain as well as 2000 Active
Directory domain (two forests) with trust relationships between. We
currently have one Exchange 5.5 server in the 2003 AD domain with
mailboxes for users on both domains.
I would like to use the "standard deployment method" but in order to do
so, I see that I might need to first migrate the 2000 AD forest into the
2003 AD forest to become single forest first. Is this true?
A few other questions:
If I start the "standard deployment method" [first] by installing E2K3 on
new hardware, setting up the ADC for the primary (2003) AD domain and
moving some of the mailboxes, can I keep the 5.5 server in place for the
other (2000) AD domain until that domain is merged within the primary
forest?
Within our primary (2003) AD forest, we have two Exchange 5.5 sites, each
with it's own 5.5 server. We are connected to the remote site via T1
(1.544 Mbps) and support less than 100 desktops there. If I upgrade all
the clients to Outlook 2003 first, with the new "thin" lower-bandwidth
requirement allow me to consolidate both servers into one new E2K3
server - without the remote users complaining about email slowdowns?
Thank you in advance!
Tony
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Al Mulnick
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:59 pm Post subject:
Re: Exchange 5.5 to 2003, Multiple Forests, Other Questions |
|
|
I would like to use the "standard deployment method" but in order to do so,
I see that I might need to first migrate the 2000 AD forest into the 2003 AD
forest to become single forest first. Is this true?
No, you don't "have" to migrate the users. It wouldn't be a bad idea, but
you don't have to. See the http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/library
deployment docs for the multi-forest scenarios. Yours would be a two-forest
scenario with one forest hosting the Exchange org.
It's better to use a single forest and much less complex, but it's not a
requirement.
You can leave the existing 5.5 server, ADC, and Exchange 2003 up as long as
it takes to migrate. It adds complexity and therefore risk, but it works
just fine.
Bandwidth friendly? Hmm... I suppose that depends on how you use it doesn't
it? T-1? That doesn't mean a lot to me because I can't tell how much
available bandwidth, latency, other apps, usage patterns, etc. I also can't
tell how the users will use Outlook to really make that judgement call or if
they'll all be online at the same time getting the same mail and still
expect decent performance (whatever decent turns out to be).
You'll need to research more to find out if you can deploy that way.
Al
"Tony Scarola" <tony.scarola@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23C0fTnDmFHA.3120@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Hello!
I am currently researching the options for migrating from Exchange 5.5 to
2003. We have 2003 Active Directory domain as well as 2000 Active
Directory domain (two forests) with trust relationships between. We
currently have one Exchange 5.5 server in the 2003 AD domain with
mailboxes for users on both domains.
I would like to use the "standard deployment method" but in order to do
so, I see that I might need to first migrate the 2000 AD forest into the
2003 AD forest to become single forest first. Is this true?
A few other questions:
If I start the "standard deployment method" [first] by installing E2K3 on
new hardware, setting up the ADC for the primary (2003) AD domain and
moving some of the mailboxes, can I keep the 5.5 server in place for the
other (2000) AD domain until that domain is merged within the primary
forest?
Within our primary (2003) AD forest, we have two Exchange 5.5 sites, each
with it's own 5.5 server. We are connected to the remote site via T1
(1.544 Mbps) and support less than 100 desktops there. If I upgrade all
the clients to Outlook 2003 first, with the new "thin" lower-bandwidth
requirement allow me to consolidate both servers into one new E2K3
server - without the remote users complaining about email slowdowns?
Thank you in advance!
Tony
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Scarola
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:23 am Post subject:
Update: Re: Exchange 5.5 to 2003, Multiple Forests, Other Qu |
|
|
Well, I did the Exchange 2003 Server install tonight - co-existing with the
Exchange 5.5 organization. Everything went pretty good except for the
following. The "Exchange Server 2003 Recipient Object Check
(RecipientDSInteg)" came back and mentioned "RecipientDSInteg detected a
problem." In the e2kdsinteg.log file were the following entries:
--------> Recipient results from (mailNickname=*) ...
DN = CN={first name} {last name},CN=Users,DC={domain 2 name},DC=local
object-class = top$person$organizationalperson$user
The user is mailbox enabled and contains no home-mdb (homeMdb)
The user is mailbox enabled and contains no home-mta (homeMta)
The user is mailbox enabled and does not contain an account control
(msExchUserAccountControl)
This was repeated for all the users that were in domain 2. Domain 2 is a
domain that exists within the same forest as the primary domain (domain 1)
but is on the other side of a WAN link. There are two DCs in domain 2, both
at the remote side and no DCs for domain 2 at the local site. There are no
Exchange servers for domain 2 at the remote side, but those users use the
local Exchange 5.5 server for mail.
I am guessing it has something to do with permissions, but not sure. Any
ideas?
Tony
"Al Mulnick" <amulnick_No_SPAM@ncDOTrr.com> wrote in message
news:e235U2OmFHA.3568@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | I would like to use the "standard deployment method" but in order to do so,
I see that I might need to first migrate the 2000 AD forest into the 2003
AD
forest to become single forest first. Is this true?
No, you don't "have" to migrate the users. It wouldn't be a bad idea, but
you don't have to. See the http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/library
deployment docs for the multi-forest scenarios. Yours would be a
two-forest scenario with one forest hosting the Exchange org.
It's better to use a single forest and much less complex, but it's not a
requirement.
You can leave the existing 5.5 server, ADC, and Exchange 2003 up as long
as it takes to migrate. It adds complexity and therefore risk, but it
works just fine.
Bandwidth friendly? Hmm... I suppose that depends on how you use it
doesn't it? T-1? That doesn't mean a lot to me because I can't tell how
much available bandwidth, latency, other apps, usage patterns, etc. I
also can't tell how the users will use Outlook to really make that
judgement call or if they'll all be online at the same time getting the
same mail and still expect decent performance (whatever decent turns out
to be).
You'll need to research more to find out if you can deploy that way.
Al
"Tony Scarola" <tony.scarola@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23C0fTnDmFHA.3120@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
Hello!
I am currently researching the options for migrating from Exchange 5.5 to
2003. We have 2003 Active Directory domain as well as 2000 Active
Directory domain (two forests) with trust relationships between. We
currently have one Exchange 5.5 server in the 2003 AD domain with
mailboxes for users on both domains.
I would like to use the "standard deployment method" but in order to do
so, I see that I might need to first migrate the 2000 AD forest into the
2003 AD forest to become single forest first. Is this true?
A few other questions:
If I start the "standard deployment method" [first] by installing E2K3 on
new hardware, setting up the ADC for the primary (2003) AD domain and
moving some of the mailboxes, can I keep the 5.5 server in place for the
other (2000) AD domain until that domain is merged within the primary
forest?
Within our primary (2003) AD forest, we have two Exchange 5.5 sites, each
with it's own 5.5 server. We are connected to the remote site via T1
(1.544 Mbps) and support less than 100 desktops there. If I upgrade all
the clients to Outlook 2003 first, with the new "thin" lower-bandwidth
requirement allow me to consolidate both servers into one new E2K3
server - without the remote users complaining about email slowdowns?
Thank you in advance!
Tony
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in