Exchange Server

janet · Guest

I have look through all of Microsoft documents and emails from other groups
and no clear best practices. What would it take to have a centralize
Exchange Server compared to decentralized? I mean what is acceptable
bandwidth, most remote offices have 12 or less users, 1 has 60 and another
has over 100. Same for my Europe locations. I am trying to figure out when
do you place an Exchange Server and when can you centralized. Microsoft just
centralized most of their servers where others are stating place an exchange
server in a location with over 100 users. Anyone out there really have a
best practice of when to do what?

Bharat Suneja · Guest

No real rule of thumb or magic number that fits all. Things to consider:
1. **Service level requirements - perhaps the most important. Seen folks
scale back server consolidation plans and end up placing a mailbox server.
2. *Bandwidth between locations and utilization: check Client Network
Traffic with Exchange Server 2003
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/exchange/2003/clinettraf.mspx
3. Server specs and utilization
4. *Number and type of users - some users are quite OK with OWA access to a
remote mailbox server, and yet others with Outlook 2003 Cached Mode.
5. *Cost of downtime (of consolidated server(s) and WAN link that could
leave remote users without access even to local intrasite mail).
6. Probability of downtime (due to WAN link outage, probability of server
outage will be more or less the same whether server is in datacenter or
local)
7. Geographical locations, time zone differences
8. Administrative model and support plans

Your mileage may vary depending on all of the above. Server consolidation is
a great idea as long as these factors are carefully considered and risk
management done, imo.
--
Bharat Suneja
MCSE, MCT
www.zenprise.com
blog: www.suneja.com/blog

	Exchange Server Forum Index -> Design	All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1