Hello
I am a student in a company and I have to study the best way migration to migrate 2003 EXchange organization to 2007 EXchange organization.
There are some informations about EXChange 2003 organization:- 2 Exchange clusters under Windows 2003=> Enterprise plans to buy new server for the new clusters in Windows 2008 server . EXCH 1 with 3 Storage Groupe (SG) SG 1 : 3 mailbox store SG 2: 5 mailbox store SG 3 : 1 mailbox store (EXCH 1 in a Cluster) EXCH 2 with 5 storage groupe (EXCH 2 in a Cluster) - Exchange EXCH 3 stand alone under W2003 -EXCH 1 et EXCH 2 are in the same administrative group (for emails) .-EXCH 3 is in a new administrativ group (only for unified messaging)- There are 2 buildings in the same area (less than 500 km) - Each cluster ( EXCH 1 in a cluster, EXCH 2 in a cluster) has one node in each building : one node of EXCH 1 cluster is in the building 1 and one node in the building 2 one node of EXCH 2 cluster is in the building 2 and one node in the building 2 EXCH 1,2,3 are in the same DMZ and the same AD . - In another DMZ, and in another AD, there is another EXChange EXCH4 in a cluster .
so there is one AD forest per DMZ .
in the first DMZ : EXCH 1 (IN CLUSTER) ,EXCH 2 (IN CLUSTER) ,EXCH 3 (STAND ALONE) :FIRST AD FOREST
in the second DMZ: EXCH 4 (IN CLUSTER) : SECOND AD FOREST
If I understand , there are 2 Exchange Organizations in 2 separate DMZ.
Question 1: If I plan to migrate EXCH in each seperate DMZ Do I have to follow up the migration procedure for accross forest or plan 2 separate migration with unique AD for 2 DMZ ? Question 2: Can we plan to migrate the first DMZ with no impact on the second DMZ ?
Question 3:They need to keep the second Exchange on the second DMZ on EXCH 2003 for a while as there are NIX services (interface with OTUC server) working with OWA and no idea if they can be running with EXCH 2007. is anyone use these kind of services in their network under exchange 2007?
Hi,
Q1 : No the Exchange organizations are not linked to each other, you do not need to look at booth Organizations together. If you migrate one you will not impact the other. You do not need any Cross Forest migration except if you want to move users from one Organization to Another but I guess that is not the case
Q2 : Yes (see Q1)
Q3 : Not really sure what you mean with NIX & OTUC, do you mean UNIX? So I don't have an answer
Johan
Thanks Johan for your quick reply.
Q1: Right . Don't want to move users from one organization to another.
Q3: sorry . The NX services in EXChange 2003 are : NxPimService, NxmailService, NxnotifService. They are the interfaces with Exchange and the OTUC server to take the wave files.
Is these services are supported in EXCH2007?
Best is to check with your Alacatel partner about the supportability of OTUC and Exchange 2007, but I honestly don't think it's a problem. I've come across an OTUC proposal for an Exchange 2010 architecture so there must be some support available.
Sincerely,
Tonino BrunoTonino@btconsulting.be | ICT Consultant | B.T. Consulting bvba
Thanks for your response. Will get in touch with an Alcatel partner about this question.
Next Question (Q4): See That CAS in DMZ is not supported by Microsoft. Discussed this with the engineers involved by security , in fact 2 AD are included in 2 separate VLANs. In these configuration as well ,I suppose that they are not impacted each other?
Q5: How does the architecture have to be configured , I mean ' DMZ ', to not be supported by Microsoft ? For example between 2 firewall ?
Suna
So in your case there is no issue in having exchange servers in the DMZ, as all servers are on the same subnet and there is no screening between each other.
The supportability statement is to prevent people from having a CAS server in the DMZ while the rest of the architecture, such as the mailbox server, is in the internal network.
As long as you don't screen the connections between Exchange servers then you're fine.
Also not an issue if you're doing SMTP Routing between the orgs in the DMZ and Internal Network.
Hi all,
Question 1: I am wondering if anyone have ever heard or experienced the product Quest Migration manager for Exchange which may help to migrate an Exchange organization from 2000/2003/2007 to Exchange 2003/2007?
In my case, we need to migrate from Exchange 203 to Exchange 2007.
Question 2: Regarding the different solution within EXchange 2007: CCR , LCR , geocluster, ....
I am not sure but how can I say that geo cluster is better than CCR as solution . The 2 sites are not so far , around 15 km and dwdm technoloji (fiber) are used between the two extremites . latency delay is less than 10 ms.
thanks
Why would you need a migration tool such as Quest? Basically you do a move-mailbox within the same organization and perform a cross-forest move mailbox if you have a different Exchange organizations.
As to your other question based on the fact that geo-clusters (SSC) are no longer genrally available in Exchange 2010 (although there is support for third-party replication) and you get data availability with CCR without requiring a complex storage solution I would definitely recommend you to look into CCR.
Is there a particular reason why you are not looking at Exchange 2010 ?
Sincerely,Tonino Bruno
Hi Tonino,
Thanks for your quick response. It is great that in that site everyone are so helpful like you.
There is no reason but I ve seen that Microsoft recommends a transition and advise to migrate first from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2007 and after advise to migrate from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2007
Have you experienced to migrate from exchange to Exchange 2010
Regarding my other question, Do you mean that we can choose a CCR architecture in that configuration with 2 technical local which are not on the same building , connected by fiber in a LAN?
Regards,
Hi ,
in my previous note , few mistakes: first from exchange 2003-----------to exchange 2007
after from exchange 2007 ---------------to exchange 2010
Not a problem, that's what a community is for
A transition is indeed recommended and you can directly move from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2010. You would add an Exchange 2007 server first if you still need to support applications that are not running on Exchange 2010 or if you need the Transporter Suite to do IMAP or Domino migrations. If you are uncertain about this you're best to add an Exchange 2007 server before deploying the other Exchange 2010 server roles.
However this does not mean you have to transition everything to Exchange 2007 first and then do the Exchange 2010 transitioning. Simply add the Exchange 2007 server and then continue with adding Exchange 2010 servers, when you've done your deploymen you basically move the mailboxes straight to Exchange 2010.
Use the exdeploy tool to get a better understanding of the transitioning process when comming from Exchange 2003http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/exdeploy2010/default.aspx#Home
a CCR Cluster can be stretched across 2 physical locations, each node would be connected to the local network and storage (could be DAS or SAN). No need for storage replication as this is taken care of by Exchange itself
Thanks for your response. For a good understanding of CCR , You mean that in CCR Cluster configuration , I can configure
- 1st node on the 1st physical location
- 2nd node on the 2nd physical location
and each node connected to the SAN . In that configuration , can we put the SAN of the first node on the 2nd physical location SAN and the 2nd node on the 1st pysical location?
Question 2 : That means that the difference between the geo-Cluster is not that we have a dispersed node Cluster but that in the geo-Cluster there is SSC server in other location ?
You could connect your SAN in Datacenter1 to your servers in Datacenter2 and vice versa, however that's not a requirement for CCR. The solution is resilient either way and operationally it's easier to put the storage in the same datacenter as your server.
The concept of a Geo-Cluster is to have servers and storage "stretched" across different physical locations. Stretching the servers would be done with Windows Server Failover Cluster and stretching the storage by means of Storage based replication (HP Continuous Access for example) and failover capabilities (HP CLX).
Hi Good morning,
What I don't understand Tonino in the explanation is Geo -cluster need to have servers and storage "stretched" across different physical locations.HOwever in CCR configuration , we can also use node servers and storage in different location too. So what means ''streched '' which make difference between CCR and geo-cluster.
Sorry to ask similar question , but I really need to understand the difference between the 2 concepts...
GEO-Cluster, as with SCC, is where you have shared storage "stretched" over 2 physical location. the storage volumes are synchronized by means of array based mechanisms and not application level such as found in CCR. In a Geo-Cluster you typically find a solution from the storage vendor integrated with the cluster to help automate the storage failover.
But I guess it's semantics, I don't consider a CCR solution to be a true geo-cluster, I rather think of it as a stretched cluster using independant storage.
SSC as Geocluster uses storage array based replication mechanisme
CCR is using Exchange Continuous Replication on the application level