|
|
|
date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 05:24:02 -0700,
group: microsoft.public.exchange.design
back
Re: Back end front end design
No, you could still have instances where the user would have to communicate
across the WAN to access data. For example, public folder data would have
to traverse the WAN at some point (whether to replicate or to be accessed -
decision is which is going to be more). If you share mailbox folders,
you'll have to access that mailbox regardless of where it lives (which
site).
I think your management misunderstands how Exchange works on the wire. It is
FAR better with respect to the network to follow Andrew's topology
suggestions vs. decentralizing Exchange. In addition to the network traffic
for mail, you also have to traverse the WAN for authentication/directory
usage. If you instead use the cached mode and possibly use RPC/HTTP you
don't ever have to use the WAN if you have internet connections from each
site and you can contain your Exchange server in the same site, provide
better backup/recovery services and likely reduce the network bandwidth used
on the WAN.
It's a tradeoff between user traffic and replication, routing, Active
Directory, etc traffic, and the client accessing the servers for service.
There's some consideration to user perception of service in there, but that
comes later in this conversation I think.
Al
"Mazen" wrote in message
news:3C5F7E4A-C7AA-46B4-B8A8-E0948381C101@microsoft.com...
>
> Hi Andrew
>
> Appreciate your point & defiantly agree with you. I explain that to the
> management but they ready to spend money & accept any consciousness in the
> long run
>
> Loay,
>
> Does the routing topology can determine mailbox location?
>
> Example
> User in the Site1 should not comminute to any server unless the mailbox is
> not located in the same server
>
> also if you can tell me the Minimum bandwidth requirement for GC's
> replication
>
> Mazen.
>
>
date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 09:55:28 -0400
author: Al Mulnick
Re: Back end front end design
You miss the point of Exchange. Exchange handles that routing for you
making it so you, the admin don't have to worry about where the user is
located in relation to his email address.
Short answer, that would work effortlessly (note, some clients will even
resolve the user name prior to sending the message, others will be submitted
to the server and then routed properly; this is in contrast to the
Sendmail/Postfix routing scheme which uses a one-domain/one-host <OK,
natively it does this but could be different in theory> routing topology by
default.
Does that help? Or have I just confused things?
"Mazen" wrote in message
news:8104593A-CCE6-4594-8DA8-274B44BAA9A1@microsoft.com...
> OK,
> Lets say, i have dedicated exchange server on each site,
> not a front end back end solution,
> all the servers will be having the same domain name for mail.
> for example example.com
> so i have like 10 servers with the name example.com when user from site 1
> sending to a user on site 4 he will type his e-mail@example.com which is
> not
> existing on site's 1 server,
> can i configure exchange to route specific users to specific servers and
> so
> on?
> thanks
> Mazen
date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 21:54:18 -0400
author: Al Mulnick
|
|
