RE: Exchange Deployment Question
- From: "Chris Nielsen" <cnielsen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'[ExchangeList]'" <exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 20:00:08 -0600
We have a similar situation, with a main site in one state, and a remote
office in another state. I have the network setup with one domain spanning
both offices, with each office configured with a separate Site in Active
Directory. This gives each office the autonomy to continue operating if the
VPN link goes down, but avoids all the issues with setting up domain trusts
to try to maintain separate domains for each office.
We have one Exchange organization with a single Exchange server in each
office and a GC server in each office as well (GC is housed on a
non-Exchange server). All public folders are replicated to both servers, but
there's nothing else that is specifically setup between the two servers.
We have T1 equivalent lines at each office, and a hardware VPN between our
firewall devices. This is not a dedicated line, just a VPN configured across
both offices' INET connection.
In the time I've had this set up (going on two years now) we've never had
any issues with this configuration. Mail is routed from one Exchange server
to the other nearly as fast as if they were on a local LAN together. At one
point I was trying to set up separate domains in each office, but I'm very
glad now that I didn't do it that way.
Chris Nielsen
Systems Administrator
New Dawn Technologies
-----Original Message-----
From: Lee Swanson [mailto:swanson@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 7:36 PM
To: [ExchangeList]
Subject: [exchangelist] Exchange Deployment Question
http://www.MSExchange.org/
Am in the process of changing our Exchange setup. We currently run one
Exchange 2000 server at a central site. Two remote sites connect through a
site to site VPN on a T1 Internet connection. One site is a Novell network
and the other is their own W2K AD. The options we are considering:
1. Put an Exchange Server in the other two sites and deploy AD across the
WAN.
2. Put in a Terminal Server in the main site holding the Exchange server.
This would be Windows 2003. The Terminal Server would need to facilitate
50-60 remote users. We currently have a Windows 2000 Terminal Server that
hosts 2-5 users remotely for Exchange and FileMaker access and this seems to
be working well.
The reason for making the change is to speed up access. Any comments on what
would work best would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Lee
------------------------------------------------------
List Archives: http://www.webelists.com/cgi/lyris.pl?enter=exchangelist
Exchange Newsletters: http://www.msexchange.org/pages/newsletter.asp
Exchange FAQ: http://www.msexchange.org/pages/larticle.asp?type=FAQ
------------------------------------------------------
Other Internet Software Marketing Sites:
Leading Network Software Directory: http://www.serverfiles.com
No.1 ISA Server Resource Site: http://www.isaserver.org
Windows Security Resource Site: http://www.windowsecurity.com/
Network Security Library: http://www.secinf.net/
Windows 2000/NT Fax Solutions: http://www.ntfaxfaq.com
------------------------------------------------------
You are currently subscribed to this MSExchange.org Discussion List as:
cnielsen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
Other related posts:
