Best way to implement Front-End/Back-End Exchange 2003
Exchange Server Forum Index Exchange Server
Discussion forums for Microsoft Exchange Server users.
Microsoft Outlook
 
 FAQFAQ   MemberlistMemberlist     RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 
Google
 
Web ExchangeServerHelp.com
Best way to implement Front-End/Back-End Exchange 2003

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Exchange Server Forum Index -> Design
Author Message
Iván Sainz
Guest
Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 11:53 pm    Post subject: Best way to implement Front-End/Back-End Exchange 2003 Reply with quote
Hello,
I have been assigned a migration from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2003.
The question is whic is the best way to implement a Front-End/Back-End
Exchange 2003 architecture?
1) FE-BE from the beginning
2) Migrate to a single-server architecture and then migrate that to the
Front-End/Back-End architecture

I should say why it is better according to time of implementation and risk.

Thank you

Back to top
Rui J.M. Silva
Guest
Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 12:18 am    Post subject: Re: Best way to implement Front-End/Back-End Exchange 2003 Reply with quote
To setup a front-end server you just need to install the OS and then
Exchange. There's no configuration issues, besides checking a check-box, so
you should deal first with the migration to the future back-end server.
Option 2), definitelly.

--
Blog "subject: exchange"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ehlo/



"Iván Sainz" <IvnSainz@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5B9AC961-13BB-4210-A15E-42F05CD2A164@microsoft.com...
Quote:
Hello,
I have been assigned a migration from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2003.
The question is whic is the best way to implement a Front-End/Back-End
Exchange 2003 architecture?
1) FE-BE from the beginning
2) Migrate to a single-server architecture and then migrate that to the
Front-End/Back-End architecture

I should say why it is better according to time of implementation and
risk.

Thank you
Back to top
Iván Sainz
Guest
Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 7:07 am    Post subject: Re: Best way to implement Front-End/Back-End Exchange 2003 Reply with quote
That is what I thought because of the risk.
Option 2 I think is less risky since you do one thing at a time.
But, what about time?
Does is take more time option 1 than option 2 or just about the same?


"Rui J.M. Silva" wrote:

Quote:
To setup a front-end server you just need to install the OS and then
Exchange. There's no configuration issues, besides checking a check-box, so
you should deal first with the migration to the future back-end server.
Option 2), definitelly.

--
Blog "subject: exchange"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ehlo/



"Iván Sainz" <IvnSainz@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5B9AC961-13BB-4210-A15E-42F05CD2A164@microsoft.com...
Hello,
I have been assigned a migration from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2003.
The question is whic is the best way to implement a Front-End/Back-End
Exchange 2003 architecture?
1) FE-BE from the beginning
2) Migrate to a single-server architecture and then migrate that to the
Front-End/Back-End architecture

I should say why it is better according to time of implementation and
risk.

Thank you




Back to top
Rui J.M. Silva
Guest
Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 11:03 pm    Post subject: Re: Best way to implement Front-End/Back-End Exchange 2003 Reply with quote
Both take the same time.
Configuring a front-end / back-end architecture takes very little time, so
deal first with the migration.

--
Blog "subject: exchange"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ehlo


"Iván Sainz" <IvnSainz@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1834F56C-FFCA-4D62-AD1B-969EFE0874ED@microsoft.com...
Quote:
That is what I thought because of the risk.
Option 2 I think is less risky since you do one thing at a time.
But, what about time?
Does is take more time option 1 than option 2 or just about the same?


"Rui J.M. Silva" wrote:

To setup a front-end server you just need to install the OS and then
Exchange. There's no configuration issues, besides checking a check-box,
so
you should deal first with the migration to the future back-end server.
Option 2), definitelly.

--
Blog "subject: exchange"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ehlo/



"Iván Sainz" <IvnSainz@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5B9AC961-13BB-4210-A15E-42F05CD2A164@microsoft.com...
Hello,
I have been assigned a migration from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2003.
The question is whic is the best way to implement a Front-End/Back-End
Exchange 2003 architecture?
1) FE-BE from the beginning
2) Migrate to a single-server architecture and then migrate that to the
Front-End/Back-End architecture

I should say why it is better according to time of implementation and
risk.

Thank you


Back to top
justin_dabs
Guest
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 4:28 am    Post subject: Re: Best way to implement Front-End/Back-End Exchange 2003 Reply with quote
Is there any step by step guides on setting up FE/BE exchange servers
with any firewalls? e.g. which ports needs to be opened on the firewall
for successful installation of the FE exchange server.

any help, links etc would be most greatly appreciated.

thanks

justin_dabs
(student of life)



Rui J.M. Silva (nospam4me) wrote:
Quote:
Both take the same time.
Configuring a front-end / back-end architecture takes very little
time, so
deal first with the migration.

--
Blog "subject: exchange"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ehlo


"Iván Sainz" <IvnSainz@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1834F56C-FFCA-4D62-AD1B-969EFE0874ED@microsoft.com...
That is what I thought because of the risk.
Option 2 I think is less risky since you do one thing at a time.
But, what about time?
Does is take more time option 1 than option 2 or just about the
same?


"Rui J.M. Silva" wrote:

To setup a front-end server you just need to install the OS and
then
Exchange. There's no configuration issues, besides checking a
check-box,
so
you should deal first with the migration to the future back-end
server.
Option 2), definitelly.

--
Blog "subject: exchange"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ehlo/



"Iván Sainz" <IvnSainz@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
news:5B9AC961-13BB-4210-A15E-42F05CD2A164@microsoft.com...
Hello,
I have been assigned a migration from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange
2003.
The question is whic is the best way to implement a
Front-End/Back-End
Exchange 2003 architecture?
1) FE-BE from the beginning
2) Migrate to a single-server architecture and then migrate that
to the
Front-End/Back-End architecture

I should say why it is better according to time of
implementation and
risk.

Thank you


Back to top
Rui J.M. Silva
Guest
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 6:01 pm    Post subject: Re: Best way to implement Front-End/Back-End Exchange 2003 Reply with quote
It depends on the firewall used.
Basically you only need ports 80/443.
There are lots of documentation on the internet about the subject:
www.msexchange.org
www.msd2d.com
www.searchexchange.com

--
Blog "subject: exchange"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ehlo/



"justin_dabs" <justin_dabs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107901732.252049.209380@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Is there any step by step guides on setting up FE/BE exchange servers
with any firewalls? e.g. which ports needs to be opened on the firewall
for successful installation of the FE exchange server.

any help, links etc would be most greatly appreciated.

thanks

justin_dabs
(student of life)



Rui J.M. Silva (nospam4me) wrote:
Quote:
Both take the same time.
Configuring a front-end / back-end architecture takes very little
time, so
deal first with the migration.

--
Blog "subject: exchange"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ehlo


"Iván Sainz" <IvnSainz@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1834F56C-FFCA-4D62-AD1B-969EFE0874ED@microsoft.com...
That is what I thought because of the risk.
Option 2 I think is less risky since you do one thing at a time.
But, what about time?
Does is take more time option 1 than option 2 or just about the
same?


"Rui J.M. Silva" wrote:

To setup a front-end server you just need to install the OS and
then
Exchange. There's no configuration issues, besides checking a
check-box,
so
you should deal first with the migration to the future back-end
server.
Option 2), definitelly.

--
Blog "subject: exchange"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ehlo/



"Iván Sainz" <IvnSainz@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
news:5B9AC961-13BB-4210-A15E-42F05CD2A164@microsoft.com...
Hello,
I have been assigned a migration from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange
2003.
The question is whic is the best way to implement a
Front-End/Back-End
Exchange 2003 architecture?
1) FE-BE from the beginning
2) Migrate to a single-server architecture and then migrate that
to the
Front-End/Back-End architecture

I should say why it is better according to time of
implementation and
risk.

Thank you


Back to top
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Exchange Server Forum Index -> Design All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
 You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Windows Server Dedicated Servers
Contact Us
New Topics Powered by phpBB