Re: Offline Files -- & -- Migration Strategy

From: Dave Nickason [SBS MVP] (gwdibble_at_NOSPAM.frontiernet.net)
Date: 07/27/04 

Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 18:22:28 -0400

Happy to help - IMO Exchange Server and Outlook are why offices need
computers :-)

Answers numbered same as questions:

1. Exchange won't use Net Folders, and you probably won't have calendar
problems once you migrate. You can use Public Folder calendars that can be
seen by everyone, or by any group you choose (we have an Office Calendar
where people put vacations, Dr. appointments, etc. as an example).
Additionally, users can share their personal calendars with anyone they
wish, while controlling the access level. For example, I can see my boss's
calendar, but not add, edit, or delete entries. Outlook 2003 has a great
built-in calendar viewer that lets you view other users' personal calendars
side-by-side (if you have the right permissions to view them in the first
place).

2. I'm not sure how your existing setup is getting the messages into
Outlook. If Outlook is retrieving the messages from a POP account, I'd just
set up the POP Connector in Exchange to pop your account and put the
messages in your Exchange Server mailbox. Then use Outlook to import the
messages from your PST into your server mailbox. You shouldn't have to
change any NAT or other network settings - just configure Exchange to pick
up your account's messages in whatever way Outlook is doing now. I'm not
familiar with MailSite, so if this doesn't sound right it's probably not -
post back.

3. You don't need an IP for Exchange. It'll use your external NIC IP.
Exchange will deliver messages to whatever location is specified in the mail
profile on the workstation. It's really an Outlook function. If Exchange
picks up the messages, they go to the server mailbox. Then if the default
delivery location is the server mailbox, that's where they stay (this is the
right configuration for a fully implemented Exchange Server). If the
default delivery location is the PST, when the user starts Outlook the
messages get grabbed out of the server mailbox and put in the PST. This is
something to watch for as you migrate - if Outlook is set up to use a PST,
the mailbox will end up empty every time the user starts Outlook. At the
appropriate time, you can protect against this by changing the default
delivery location in control panel/mail without starting Outlook. Then when
you do start Outlook, it'll know to leave the messages in the mailbox.

I might not be 100% clear on your existing configuration, so feel free to
post back if you have more questions.

"Bryan Linton" <blinton@nospam.connellinsurance.com> wrote in message
news:OhJLiECdEHA.3596@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Dave,
>
> Thanks very much for the excellent info. The more I thought about it, the
> more I suspected that earlier advice I'd been given by an acquaintance to
> make Exchange migration the last step was wrong for our situation. I'm
> going to make the exchange migration a priority. Not having used Outlook
> in
> an exchange environment before, I'm not too clear on a few things, so I
> hope
> you don't mind a few more questions.
>
> 1.) We've been having troubles with Net Folders not synchronizing/sharing
> calendars correctly between certain users. Is Net Folders not involved in
> calendar sharing at all in an exchange environment, or is it simply
> involved
> in a different way? I'm trying to see if the migration will solve those
> problems (so I can justify to the bosses that are having trouble that my
> time *should* be spent planning/implementing the migration to Exchange
> instead of troubleshooting their calendar-sharing woes for hours).
>
> 2.) I love the idea of migrating my email to Exchange for testing before
> rolling out the migration to users companywide. What I'm not clear on is
> how I could actually *do this. I can certainly set up my Outlook to look
> to
> exchange for its email, but how do I direct my email messages to the
> exchange server while all other email addresses continue to flow to our
> existing MailSite server? Is that really possible? As a first step,
> would
> I not have to migrate completely away from our existing mail server, to
> our
> Exchange server? Wouldn't I do this by changing my 1:1 NAT to point to
> the
> Exchange Server's IP?
>
> 3.) Should I bind a separate IP to the server's NIC specifically for use
> by
> Exchange? (I'm guessing not, since the port number will distinguish mail
> traffic on the NIC. But perhaps a dedicated IP would allow me to lock
> down
> the firewall a bit more finely, so that that IP will only be forwarded
> traffic on ports needed by exchange?) Could I use exchange to receive the
> mail but still deliver to client-side .pst mailboxes? You know...just to
> separate the operation into discrete, more manageable steps?
>
> Heh, I'm sorry; I realize this is a slew of questions; more than I'd
> planned. I'm willing to read to learn the answers, but I've searched
> TechNet and thus far haven't been able to find a comprehensive discussion
> of
> migration to Exchange 2003 from a non-exchange environment. Anyone who
> could point me in the right direction would have my undying gratitude.
> :-)
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Bryan
>
>
>
> "Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" <gwdibble@NOSPAM.frontiernet.net> wrote in
> message
> news:uVHxug$cEHA.644@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> I honestly didn't read the whole article, and the sentence I referenced
>> wasn't overly clear to me :-). Anyway, Outlook's offline synchronization
> is
>> best for this. There are a lot of advantages - Outlook will perform
> offline
>> almost exactly as it does online. When the user reconnects to the LAN,
> his
>> outgoing messages will be sent automatically, for example.
>>
>> Exmerge will automatically copy the PST data into the Exchange Server
>> mailboxes. It's well documented in TechNet and in the SBS migration
>> docs.
>>
>> It sounds like you're doing a lot of planning for this project, which IMO
>> will be the secret to your success. If you do this in discrete steps,
>> pausing between to make sure that everything is working, you'll either
>> end
>> up with no problems, or one problem at a time.
>>
>> I would probably get the SBS and Exchange Server up and running. Then
>> I'd
>> import my own PST into my server mailbox, changing my delivery location
> from
>> the PST to the mailbox, and thereby stopping use of the PST. That'll let
>> you test and familiarize yourself with Exchange, and become comfortable
> that
>> all is well, without any possible problems effecting your coworkers.
>>
>> After that, I'd Exmerge everyone else's PST into the server mailboxes.
> Make
>> sure their profiles all point to the server mailboxes rather than the
> PSTs,
>> and do something (move or rename) to make sure the PST files are no
>> longer
>> available to the users. You need to keep them for a while as backup, but
>> you also need to make sure they are not available for users to
> accidentally
>> dump Outlook items into, which will cause a real mess. What I do is to
>> close the PST in the Outlook folder list, then rename it, then delete it
>> a
>> few weeks later. If you don't close it in Outlook first, you may run
>> into
>> errors as Outlook looks for the file.
>>
>> At this point, you'll be on the existing workstation OS's and Office
>> versions, which all are known to work, but on the server mailboxes for
>> e-mail.
>>
>> Once everything is working satisfactorily and everyone has migrated from
> the
>> PST to the server mailbox, I'd upgrade the workstations. This will be a
>> point where there's some user down time, since you'll be installing your
> OS
>> images first. Then you'll want to do Office, since there's no reason to
>> install a prior version on a new workstation then upgrade it. But once
>> they're on the server mailboxes, everyone will have access to their
> mailbox
>> from the old workstations, the new workstations, or OWA.
>>
>> This way, you're making sure that potential problems effecting the whole
>> office are out of the way first. If you run into issues as you roll out
> the
>> Office upgrade, you'll be able to troubleshoot them one at a time, or
> leave
>> problem users on the prior version while you sort them out.
>>
>> There's a lot of good documentation about deploying Office with an
>> administrative install, and related topics, on the Office web site
>> (office.microsoft.com).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Bryan L" <blinton@connellinsurance.nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:eMFEOr3cEHA.4092@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> > If you read the full article, you'll see the context in which that
> phrase,
>> > "...all but the *.pst extension..." is used. The article actually
>> > describes
>> > how to take .pst files off the exclusion list, thereby allowing Offline
>> > Files to synchronize .pst files. But anyway.
>> >
>> > Thanks for the info on configuring offline store; I think you've
>> > pointed
>> > me
>> > in the right direction, since I hadn't found much info on Outlook's
>> > built-in
>> > synchronization method (though I hadn't looked much yet :-) ). That
>> > may
>> > be
>> > the answer for us...I'll look into it and post back with results.
>> >
>> > Incidentally, in a not-exactly-related question, I wouldn't mind a bit
> of
>> > advice on the best migration stragegy to move us from Outlook 2000 to
>> > Outlook 2003. Currently we have Office 2000 Std deployed thru
> standalone
>> > installs, but I'd like to deploy Office 2003 Std thru Group Policy.
> We're
>> > not yet using Exchange; I think that'll be the last thing to
>> > switchover,
>> > unless there's some snazzy wizard that can automatically import data
> from
>> > users'.PST files into the Exchange store at the same time Office 2003
>> > is
>> > deployed via Group Policy. By the time we try to roll this out, the
> .PST
>> > files will all reside in a shared folder, inside subfolders matching
> each
>> > username.
>> >
>> > Also to be noted is the fact that since many of our Windows XP installs
>> > are
>> > upgrades from 98, I want to deploy a clean, sysprepped image of XP
> before
>> > rolling out Office 2003. In this case, would it be better to migrate to
>> > Exchange first? I'm trying to nail down the optimal order of tasks.
>> >
>> > Thanks again
>> >
>> > Bryan
>> >
>> > "Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" <gwdibble@NOSPAM.frontiernet.net> wrote in
>> > message
>> > news:%239wDft1cEHA.2504@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> >> That KB references something about "all but the .pst extension" in the
>> >> almost-last sentence, so I'd bet there's no way to do what you're
> trying
>> >> with a PST. That's consistent with my understanding that PST files
> can't
>> > be
>> >> synchronized.
>> >>
>> >> You should be able to make the PST data available to offline laptop
> users
>> >> with an OST (offline store). This is the intended purpose of
>> >> Outlook's
>> >> offline synchronization, and it should work to make users' PST data
>> >> available when they're off the LAN. Just find Send and Receive
> settings
>> > on
>> >> the Outlook Tools menu (exact location depends on Outlook version).
> You
>> >> have to be thorough in how you set it up so that you have everything
> you
>> >> need when away - make sure all folders you need are selected, plus
>> >> offline
>> >> address book. Also choose the synchronize forms option if you use any
>> >> custom forms. If the users disconnect and try to work offline before
>> >> leaving the office for the first time, you shouldn't run into any
> issues
>> >> with this configuration.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Bryan Linton" <blinton@nospam.connellinsurance.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:%234W1jS1cEHA.692@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> >> > As part of our preparations to migrate to Exchange 2003 and Office
>> >> > 2003,
>> >> > we
>> >> > need to implement folder redirection to redirect users' My Documents
>> >> > folders
>> >> > (containing their .pst files) to a share on a W2k member server for
>> >> > a
>> > few
>> >> > weeks while we deploy clean images of XP to clients across our
>> >> > organization.
>> >> > Consequently, it is important that the Offline Files feature allow
>> >> > us
>> >> > to
>> >> > synchronize .pst files for our laptop users. This behavior is
>> > disallowed
>> >> > by
>> >> > default; however, KB article 252509
>> >> > (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=252509) explains how
> to
>> >> > enable synchronization for normally excluded file types by editing
> the
>> >> > appropritate GPO. I've followed the instructions, but still cannot
>> >> > synchronize .pst files (I get an error message stating that .pst
> files
>> >> > cannot be synchronized). Things I've checked:
>> >> >
>> >> > - The GPO is enabled and enforced (Computer
>> >> > Configuration\Administrative
>> >> > Templates\Network\Offline Files\Files not cached, enumerated all
>> >> > default
>> >> > file types except .pst files)
>> >> > - The appropriate user and computer objects (mine, for testing
>> >> > purposes)
>> >> > are contained within the OU to which the GPO is linked.
>> >> > - The server has been logged off and back on, per the KB article's
>> >> > instructions
>> >> > - I have run gpupdate.exe
>> >> > - I have rebooted the server
>> >> > - I have moved the .pst file to a separate share I created in an
>> >> > attempt
>> >> > to
>> >> > manually configure offline files on that share.
>> >> >
>> >> > What's interesting about this is that about six weeks ago, we
>> >> > redirected
>> > a
>> >> > particular user's My Documents folder to reside on a mapped network
>> > drive
>> >> > (the redirection was done from the client side, not via group
> policy).
>> >> > She
>> >> > is not a laptop user, so I have not tested whether her documents and
>> > email
>> >> > are actually available offline, but she gets no synchronization
>> >> > error
>> > when
>> >> > logging on and off, even though her .PST file resides in the My
>> > Documents
>> >> > folder on the network drive. Both client OSs (mine and hers) are XP
>> >> > Pro
>> >> > SP1.
>> >> >
>> >> > The KB article says it applies to 2000 Server and Pro; does that
>> >> > mean
>> > the
>> >> > information is invalid for users of SBS 2003 and XP Pro? Is there
>> >> > an
>> >> > article which addresses this situation for our newer OSs? Any help
>> >> > appreciated.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> >
>> >> > Bryan
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Critical e-mail problem.
    ... I upgraded from Win2K Server to WinSBS2003 on my desktop ... of my POP3 e-mail accounts as an Exchange Server account. ... I found that I was only receiving mail from the Exchange ... your Outlook profile will have Exchange as its default (and this ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Critical e-mail problem.
    ... I upgraded from Win2K Server to WinSBS2003 on my desktop ... of my POP3 e-mail accounts as an Exchange Server account. ... I found that I was only receiving mail from the Exchange ... your Outlook profile will have Exchange as its default (and this ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Faxe per Email über Outlook-2003
    ... Der Exchange Server ist ein Groupware- und Messaging-System der Firma ... Microsoft Exchange Server benutzt ein proprietäres RPC Protokoll namens ... Microsoft Office Outlook Web Access ...
    (microsoft.public.de.outlook)
  • Re: Outlook2003 POP3-IMAP Exchange | Confused!?
    ... exchange and sharepoint not being used. ... Folder Re-Direction and roaming profiles. ... with Outlook 2003 as the preferred choice of email client. ... registry to point to the server. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Message size differs between OST and Exchange store
    ... Determining the space used by a message: OWA and Outlook without ... Did you check the sync issues folder as Rich suggested? ... the space on the server than it really needs. ... receiving all the mail the server mailbox does. ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.admin)