|
|
|
date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:09:40 -0800,
group: microsoft.public.exchange2000.clustering
back
Re: OWA Question
Thanks for the reply Ed, I've done some research and that
seems to be the popular opinion; is there a technical
reason?
Also, as I migrate my users from one system to
another, how can I make it so that OWA will continue to
function correctly? I plan on making my current server
the front end after I move all the mailboxes but would
like to do it over a few weeks. Currently, if I use my
mailbox server (https) URL and enter a user from the
other server (http) communication breaks. I'd rather not
put my new mailbox server on the net with no SSL and I
can't figure out how to protect OWA on the cluster.
Thanks,
Dan
>-----Original Message-----
>If you want higher availability, cluster the Front-End
Servers with NLB,
>don't try to use the cluster.
>
>
>
>"Dan" wrote in
message
>news:08fe01c529b4$113b53c0$a601280a@phx.gbl...
>>I have a front end server that is working perfectly well
>> but as a precaution I'd like to configure my mailbox
>> server in much the same way as the front end in case it
>> was ever needed to serve OWA directly. So I went into
>> the HTTP protocol and chose properties of the virtual
>> server only to find forms based authentication grayed
>> out; do I need to install SSL on this box? If so,
since
>> it's a cluster is the process changed or do I just do
the
>> same thing on both nodes?
>> Thanks,
>> Dan
>
>
>.
>
date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:37:36 -0800
author: Dan
Re: OWA Question
First, if you believe that you need the high-availability that is provided
from a cluster, then you should also be saying that you are going to do the
easy things first. And that you will go out of your way to make the cluster
highly available.
So, by screwing with the OWA configuration and putting your cluster directly
available to the Internet, you've pretty well screwed up any increase in
availability that the cluster would give you. PROTECT THE MAILBOX
SERVER!!!!!
One of the jobs of a Front End server is virtualization of network names,
pretty much just as you indicate that you don't want users to have name
issues, the FE allows you to give them one URL and that's it. A NLB FE
cluster allows you to provide fault tolerance.
"Dan" wrote in message
news:02bd01c529c0$59a78e60$a401280a@phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the reply Ed, I've done some research and that
> seems to be the popular opinion; is there a technical
> reason?
> Also, as I migrate my users from one system to
> another, how can I make it so that OWA will continue to
> function correctly? I plan on making my current server
> the front end after I move all the mailboxes but would
> like to do it over a few weeks. Currently, if I use my
> mailbox server (https) URL and enter a user from the
> other server (http) communication breaks. I'd rather not
> put my new mailbox server on the net with no SSL and I
> can't figure out how to protect OWA on the cluster.
> Thanks,
> Dan
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>If you want higher availability, cluster the Front-End
> Servers with NLB,
>>don't try to use the cluster.
>>
>>
>>
>>"Dan" wrote in
> message
>>news:08fe01c529b4$113b53c0$a601280a@phx.gbl...
>>>I have a front end server that is working perfectly well
>>> but as a precaution I'd like to configure my mailbox
>>> server in much the same way as the front end in case it
>>> was ever needed to serve OWA directly. So I went into
>>> the HTTP protocol and chose properties of the virtual
>>> server only to find forms based authentication grayed
>>> out; do I need to install SSL on this box? If so,
> since
>>> it's a cluster is the process changed or do I just do
> the
>>> same thing on both nodes?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dan
>>
>>
>>.
>>
date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:20:37 -0500
author: Ed Woodrick
|
|
