Re: Move SBS 2003 standard AD, sharepoint, Exchange onto different



Hi,

If you download the help *.chm file on Migration to EBS it will
step-by-step the process to migrate from SBS 2003 to EBS...but you can
use it to document most of the processes to go from SBS 2003 to
putting Exhange on Ent.Windows 2003 server and then SharePoint v2 to
Ver3 , Moving to SQL.

If your Line of Business Apps can run on it ....why not move to
Essential Business Server, then you can manage / report the lot from
System center essentials?

Cheers

Out_theBack SBSs2008 in production.

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:46:00 -0700, mk <mk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Yes, and we used the transition pack to make it server 2003 standard
already.
We want to seperate the Exchange and the AD into two different boxes.
Currently, we have one SQL server setup already. Plan to setup
another
Exchange server and migrate the data from the old one. Another DC and
move
all the FSMO role from the old one as well.



"SteveB" wrote:

The only way to separate the components of SBS 2003 is by using the
transition pack. Are you referring to buying new separate licenses for
Exchange, SQL, etc.?

"mk" <mk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4735B27D-F944-4221-8035-02C2E151BA9D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is one big complicated project. We plan to build more than one DC
and
cluster Exchange as we moving forward. Now, our first step is to take SBS
apart onto different servers. AD/dns goes to one server DC, exchange goes
to
another member server, and sharepoint goes to SQL server. Then we'll
decommission the SBS.

Please advice how to move or migrate them properly so we don't loss any
data. Exchange is the most important that we don't want to loss.

Basically, we want to shutdown the SBS and keep everything function as
normal.
Exchange, AD, dns, IIS, sharepoint, ... all that's all in one SBS.

PS. is it possible to keep the same DC name?


Thanks in advance.






*************************************************
Outback Computers
-converging communications and computer technologies

27-31 Munster Terrace, North Melbourne Australia
**************************************************
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: So why SBS?
    ... Public folders will be in the next version.. ... The sad part of most of us is that we haven't even tried or practiced a backup/restore and we freak out over a 'single" SBS box when we haven't even tried to restore it from a harddrive. ... Exchange seems to mix its words and titles, the global/generic use of POP and SMTP for just about every Exchange function is dumb, MailEnable understands post office protocol and simple mail transfer protocol in a "meaningfull" way. ... The standard profiles in Server are quite effective assuming you add new users to the correct account in the first place and your note running more than 1 file server. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Easy to use second 2000 Server for Exchange?
    ... Existing Exchange 2000 server - therefore have the CALs - so no new ones are ... Frank McCallister SBS MVP ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: So why SBS?
    ... Public folders will be in the next version.. ... If SBS isn't for you...that's fine. ... Mailenable is an example of a freeware or pay for extra's, mail server. ... It is infinitly simpler to configure than Exchange once installed. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Email for second domain
    ... The Microsoft Exchange MTA Stacks service is normally disabled on Exchange 2003 Servers on SBS 2003. ... You can safely ignore the MTA warning messages on the SBS 2003 server. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • RE: Configuring exchange 2003 in SBS
    ... As I know, this is not related to per user mailbox, it refer to the mailbox ... store on the whole Exchange server. ... This newsgroup only focuses on SBS technical issues. ... What minimum requirement if I want this server for a fileserver? ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)

Loading