| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
Posted:
Tue Mar 22, 2005 8:18 pm Post subject:
Site Consolidation - Multiple Domain (Please Kindly Advise) |
|
|
Hi,
We have a forest that contains multiple domains and we are migrating from
Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2003. There is a proposal to have a Exchange 2003
server in one domain (DomainA) hosting mailboxes in its own domain and from
another domain (DomainB). I am wondering what is the implication for this
design.
DCs in DomainA and DCs in DomainB are in different AD sites because they are
not well-connected. What kind of permission will the DomainA Exchange
Administrator needs over DomainB? What is the recommended bandwidth for
site consolidation?
Your expert advice will be very much appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Alex
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Don Wilwol
Guest
|
Posted:
Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:42 am Post subject:
Re: Site Consolidation - Multiple Domain (Please Kindly Advi |
|
|
--
Hope it helps...........
dw
Don Wilwol
Blog - http://spaces.msn.com/members/wilwol/
Web - http://capital.net/~wilwol/dw.htm
DonWilwol(REMOVE)@yahoo.com
<Yukon@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:OtAcKouLFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Hi,
We have a forest that contains multiple domains and we are migrating from
Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2003. There is a proposal to have a Exchange
2003 server in one domain (DomainA) hosting mailboxes in its own domain
and from another domain (DomainB). I am wondering what is the implication
for this design.
So you will have 1 Exchange server and users will get there mail over the |
site link that is "not well connected"? Even with RPC over HTTP and caching
mode, this may not be acceptable.
| Quote: |
DCs in DomainA and DCs in DomainB are in different AD sites because they
are not well-connected. What kind of permission will the DomainA Exchange
Administrator needs over DomainB?
The exchange administrator will need Exchange rights, no special domain |
rights.
What is the recommended bandwidth for
| Quote: | site consolidation?
Site Consolidation? I'd look into domain consolidation and leave the sites |
alone.
| Quote: |
Your expert advice will be very much appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Alex
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Al Mulnick
Guest
|
Posted:
Thu Mar 24, 2005 8:11 am Post subject:
Re: Site Consolidation - Multiple Domain (Please Kindly Advi |
|
|
Have you seen the KB for rights?
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316792
You asked two totally separate questions:
What kind of permission will the DomainA Exchange Administrator needs over
DomainB?
Well that depends, doesn't it? What should DomainA Exchange administrator
need to do with DomainB objects in your environment? Maybe the DomainA
admins shouldn't have anything to do with DomainB rights? Maybe they need
to do all of the work? Need to know what your business/technical
requirements are before any answer would make sense.
What is the recommended bandwidth for site consolidation?
Wow. That's a pretty big order. That usually requires careful analysis and
lots of data points to figure out. It's not a cut and dry answer nor is it
a simple one as it depends on too many factors. For starters, number of
users across the WAN link, usage patterns, concurrency, average size of
messages, available bandwidth, expected performance, etc. are all important
factors to consider.
Maybe more information would be helpful here?
Al
<Yukon@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:OtAcKouLFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Hi,
We have a forest that contains multiple domains and we are migrating from
Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2003. There is a proposal to have a Exchange
2003 server in one domain (DomainA) hosting mailboxes in its own domain
and from another domain (DomainB). I am wondering what is the implication
for this design.
DCs in DomainA and DCs in DomainB are in different AD sites because they
are not well-connected. What kind of permission will the DomainA Exchange
Administrator needs over DomainB? What is the recommended bandwidth for
site consolidation?
Your expert advice will be very much appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Alex
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
|