Re: replacing 2000 front-end by 2003 front-end
- From: "Mark Arnold [MVP]" <mark@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:34:59 +0100
On 26 Aug 2005 07:44:38 -0700, twan.grotenhuis@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>For a large construction company in the Netherlands we are currently
>planning the migration from Exchange 2000 to Exchange 2003. The
>customer does not want any downtime of any kind.
>Our plan consists of the installation of two new 2003 servers in a load
>balancing configuration to replace the current SMTP bridgehead server.
>The only problem is that the current bridgehead is also a front-end
>server for OWA, POP3 and IMAP4. And as we all know, you can't install
>an Exchange 2003 server in an 2000 organisation as long as there are
>2000 front-end servers.
>
>This limitation is logical, because you don't want 2000 front-ends to
>connect to a 2003 back-end, but in our case that is not an issue..
>
>So, would it be possible to suppress the check that setup performs??
>
>Kind regards,
>Twan Grotenhuis
I'd have to check some earlier posts on this one but I remember
something along the lines of installing the 2003 boxes.
Service pack them.
Then make the boxes FE servers.
Configure the front end services (SMTP, POP, HTTPS, IMAP)
Do the outbound swing and test.
Do the inbound swing and DNS changes etc.
Decomission the 2000 FE devices
Upgrade the BE's
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: replacing 2000 front-end by 2003 front-end
- From: Don Wilwol
- Re: replacing 2000 front-end by 2003 front-end
- References:
- replacing 2000 front-end by 2003 front-end
- From: twan . grotenhuis
- replacing 2000 front-end by 2003 front-end
- Prev by Date: Delegation not working from foreign forest
- Next by Date: site consolidation
- Previous by thread: replacing 2000 front-end by 2003 front-end
- Next by thread: Re: replacing 2000 front-end by 2003 front-end
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|