Oh..It is really a news for me regarding TSM as i hav'nt used that till now... In our environment we have an identical AD and Exchange environment in an isolated network. I have installed an AD in live environment and i have taken that to the isolated nework and then proceeded with the role seize.. Then installed an exchange server with disaster recovery switch and then restored the exchange database from live environment Infact i even tried restoring exchange database in seperate exchange server in seperate forest, but was not succesfull. If you can share the document which you have done it, i can try with that George... Regards, Maha MCSE: Messaging IT Infrastructure Engineer -----Original Message----- From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Taylor, George Sent: Fri 10/13/2006 7:52 PM To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Restoring mailboxes in Exchange 2000/2003 For me yes, thats absolutly possible. My forest currently has 12 domain controllers, so I hope I would never hit a situation of losing the forest.... :-) Here's what I do, like I said mainly for testing/practice/playing, etc.. I use IBM's Tivoli Storage Manager for all backups, this includes a TDP for Exchange. In TSM I create a node called <server>-tdp, let's say EXCH1-TDP, it does the nightly full backups as well as the hourlys. At the same time I keep a VM running that is a domain controller for our test domain, as you can see from my address my domain is rcrh.org, test domain is simply test-rcrh.org. In that test domain is an Exchange server, doesn't matter what it's called, the name is not important. What is important is that when you look at it from System Manager your Administrative groups are named the same, your storage groups are named the same and your mailbox stores are named the same, no need for the databases and logs to be in the same physical location, they can be anywhere you have space. Microsoft has some doco on creating the proper Administrative group when you do the forest and domain prep, I also have mine I can send you if needed. Fortunatly TSM doesn't care what your server is named, in the options file you tell it what your name is. So even though your new Exchange server is named MAIL you can fool TSM in to believing it's name is EXCH1, eliminating the need for isolated VLans and such. I do a full restore to the date I want and I have my full Exchange environment back, however i don't have the identical AD environment. So to get to a mailbox I have to create a non-mail user in AD and then use System Manager to attach it to a mailbox. If your at the point of doing an Authoratative restore of AD you won't have the problem of Exchange and AD being different, your going to be going back to the same hourly on both. Hope this is half way coherent, havne't had any coffee yet, George Taylor Systems Programmer Regional Health Inc. _____ From: MAHADEVAN Subramanyan [mailto:SMahadevan@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:55 PM To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Restoring mailboxes in Exchange 2000/2003 Hi George/Rick, Yep... I agree with you George, users are like that and even i have faced that situation many times. But the one which is given there in the Method 3 is almost like restoring the exchange database in an exchange server in different forest. As Exchange 2000/2003 is very much dependent on Active Directory, how is it possible to restore a database in an exchange server in different Active Directory forest? Then what is the purpose of having the Recovery Storage Group? Suppose assume that if you have a single domain controller and an Exchange 2003 server. If your domain controller is dead and if you do not have any back up for the domain controller but you have a backup for your Exchange server, will it be possible to install a separate domain controller and an Exchange server in that new domain and then restore the database of the old Exchange server in the newly installed Exchange server? That is what I understand from the site which I have mentioned. Correct me if I am wrong... Regards, Maha MCSE: Messaging IT Infrastructure Engineer. _____ From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Taylor, George Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:29 PM To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Restoring mailboxes in Exchange 2000/2003 Actually we use Method 3 here on a semi-regular basis. Most of the time it's a user that has some power and they, for whatever reason, want to go back a year or more and search for some emails. Another reason is going to be litigation, if you have a good archive solution in place this is a moot point. But the last litigation we had we didn't have an archive solution in place, so we restored, search, restored next monthly and searched again and so forth. The final reason is going to be testing, I don't care about actually getting data back, I just want a testing environment that is identical to our production. It may be for simply testing a patch or practicing a full blown upgrade, either one I want to be able to easily go back to our current environment multiple times to test/practice. Just my thoughts, George Taylor Systems Programmer Regional Health Inc. _____ From: Rick Boza [mailto:rickb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:34 AM To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Restoring mailboxes in Exchange 2000/2003 So...given that Russ is right - how is it not practical? I've implemented Exchange more than a few times, and managing deleted item retention effectively is always, ALWAYS better than doing a restore. I'm a bit surprised you'd give such a response, Raj -from what I've seen you often have pretty well thought out input. If that's your only complaint about it, that seems a bit disingenuous to me. Anyway, perhaps its personal preference - personally I advocate avoiding restores whenever possible except in the case of disaster. Back to the original topic: what are you asking exactly, and then maybe we can provide a more meaningful answer. From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Periyasamy, Raj Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 10:09 AM To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Restoring mailboxes in Exchange 2000/2003 Yes, you are right _____ From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Russ Clark Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 9:55 AM To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Restoring mailboxes in Exchange 2000/2003 That is incorrect, you can recover from shift deletes if you have the dumpsteralwayson registry hack enabled. Russ Clark _____ From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Periyasamy, Raj Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:45 AM To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Restoring mailboxes in Exchange 2000/2003 I don't think the Ed Crowley Never Restore method is really useful in practical world. because, 90% of all restore requests are shift deletes. Shift delete does not send the deleted item to dumpster. Its gone for good immediately. HTH. Regards, Raj Periyasamy MCSE(Messaging), CCNA _____ From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Boza Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 9:31 AM To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: Restoring mailboxes in Exchange 2000/2003 I'm not clear on exactly what you are asking - is the question whether or not his is viable? Absolutely. Is it optimal? No, that's why Microsoft introduced the recovery storage group. But a better solution is the Ed Crowley Never Restore Method (tm) While it was originally designed around Exchange 5.5, the principles remain valid through E2K7. Rick From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of MAHADEVAN Subramanyan Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 3:31 AM To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ExchangeList] Restoring mailboxes in Exchange 2000/2003 Sorry Guys...Am posting this question again... While surfing the net i got this info from one of the Microsoft site which states that the exchange database can be restored in the different exchange server with same Org name and Structure in different forest. Here is the site http://support.microsoft.com/kb/823176 (have a glimpse at Method 3) Is it possible to restore an Exchange database from a backup in a different Exchange recovery server (with same organization name, administrative group & Storage group name) in a different Forest? Plz give your suggestions... and also let me know if any one of you have tried this and got succeeded.... Regards, Maha MCSE: Messaging Confidentiality Statement: This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain privileged, confidential information which is exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that you are strictly prohibited from disseminating or distributing this information (other than to the intended recipient) or copying this information. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Confidentiality Statement: This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain privileged, confidential information which is exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that you are strictly prohibited from disseminating or distributing this information (other than to the intended recipient) or copying this information. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return email. ***Note: The information contained in this message, including any attachments, may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the Sender immediately by a "reply to sender only" message and destroy all electronic or paper copies of the communication, including any attachments. Confidentiality Statement: This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain privileged, confidential information which is exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that you are strictly prohibited from disseminating or distributing this information (other than to the intended recipient) or copying this information. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return email. ***Note: The information contained in this message, including any attachments, may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the Sender immediately by a "reply to sender only" message and destroy all electronic or paper copies of the communication, including any attachments. Confidentiality Statement: This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain privileged, confidential information which is exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that you are strictly prohibited from disseminating or distributing this information (other than to the intended recipient) or copying this information. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return email.