Re: Two Server Implementation using Exchange 2003 Standard

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

From: Herb Cumbie (henry.cumbie_at_pc.vsd.titan.com)
Date: 05/24/04 

Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 07:54:14 -0500

Al,

Thanks for the info.

We have to establish the WAN (VPN or otherwise) to support our primary
business application. The LA users use Citrix Terminal Service Client to
enter orders directly into database which is located in Panama City. I
think in this case the two server solution will be a better answer because
the message transfer will occur in the background and the LA users will see
the better response from Exchange since they will not see the message in
their Inbox until it arrives at their server... Of course I may be wrong and
if it turns out badly it may cost me a client, but that's the chance I've
got to take. The company should see better performance over the VPN due to
increased available bandwidth and ROI will be short since they are paying
$600/mo for the Frame Relay WAN. With such a small number of users it will
not be necessary to buy any "super" server hardware (They currently use
200MHz 256 MB with total of 9 GB disk system for the Exchange 5.0 server and
it provides "adequate" service to the Panama City users, just things are
getting pretty slow over the WAN...

Bottom line, I think based on your info about RG and AG that this will work
out best.

Thanks again...

Herb

"Al Mulnick" <amulnick_No_SPAM@ncDOTrr.com> wrote in message
news:O9EbkEQQEHA.1276@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Yes you can. I do wonder if RPC/HTTP wouldn't provide better results
> however. Once configured, your users may be happier to use that feature
> especially since you wouldn't have to worry about moving data or having a
> new staff to do backup/restore etc.
> For those ten users, put them on the server via RPC/HTTP and let them out
> straight over the internet connection. Requires an upgrade to 2003 for
> Windows and Exchange as well as desktops, but could be cheaper in the long
> run. If not, then the second store would work. You'd have two Routing
> Groups, and one Admin Group. RG and AG combined is the equivalent of the
> 5.x site topology.
>
> Al
>
>
> "Herb Cumbie" <henry.cumbie@pc.vsd.titan.com> wrote in message
> news:ekE8vxHQEHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I am getting ready to migrate my client's existing mail system to
Exchange
> > 2003. The current installation consists of one Exchange 5.0 server
(yes,
> > that's what I said, Exchange 5.0) located in Panama City, Florida. I
have
> > twenty users on the LAN in Panama City. I also have 10 additional users
> > located in Los Angeles, California. Their LAN is connected to ours
using
> a
> > 128Kbps Frame Relay. The users in Los Angeles currently use Outlook to
> > connect over the WAN to our Exchange server in Panama City but the
> > performance is beginning to degrade significantly because of recent
added
> > traffic to the system. We do plan to upgrade the WAN connectivity soon,
> the
> > plan is to move to a VPN over CABLE/DSL Internet connections. The VPN
> will
> > be created using Netgear FVL328 High Speed Firewall VPN routers and
> > hopefully will provide more than 200Kbps available bandwidth over the
VPN.
> >
> > I'm leaning towards adding a server in the Los Angeles location to
provide
> > DC/GC service and DNS service. Adding Exchange to that server would, I
> > believe, help if I can put a message store on that server. So the
> question
> > is if I want to have two Exchange 2003 servers as part of the same
domain
> > structure can I use Exchange 2003 Standard and have a message store on
> each
> > server to contain the mailboxes for that geographic location?
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> >
> > Herb Cumbie
> >
> >
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Site Server Requirements.
    ... availability must be able to operate independently; if the WAN link is ... Your requirements are driving much of the design. ... I didn't comprehend what the second server per site was for, ... sites use NT Workgroups for critical server authentication and will not be ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Is UserLevel Security Really Necessary?
    ... read-write database. ... use over a WAN. ... client application to a server DB at a central site ... security considerations will be different. ...
    (comp.databases.ms-access)
  • Re: server lockup issue - narrowed down
    ... to delete the extra wan miniports installed i had to ... I used devcon.exe to reinstall the wan miniport and once that was done, ... works fine from clients and server. ... You cannot start the Routing and Remote Access service on a Windows 2000 ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: TCP Window Size
    ... terminal server, so window size wouldn't be the problem. ... network I/O, active clients, etc. ... Multiple parallel WAN links are being load ...
    (comp.dcom.sys.cisco)