Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of NeoGenomics
NeoGenomicsFlag for United States of America

asked on

Client Access Server Role ,Exchange 2007 in remote sites.

Hi all,

I have my AD site in florida and I have two remote offices wich use my only AD site here in FL.Thet are in CA and TN.Also I have my Exchange server here in FL (basically everything is here in FL),whith Mailbox,CAS and HUB Transport Role.

My plans are :

-Create a Exchange 2007 Cluster enviroment in FL (Mailbox,Hub)
-Create a VM in each site with CAS role ,inlcuding Florida ,my main office (OWA,OutlookAnywhere)-There are only File Servers in each remote site (No DControllers,neither DNSs)


My Questions is

Is this possible?

I would like to have the users from remote sites using their CAS server only.


Thanks
Avatar of Akhater
Akhater
Flag of Lebanon image

yes it is possible however i really don't see the use of it since the CAS servers in the remote office will communicate in all cases with the HUB/MBx servers in the head office so there is no bandwidth gain or anythign
why dont you consolidate all your exchange in florida and have users in remote site access it using RPC/HTTPS

Centralized exchange, centralized backup, centralized DR
any issues - you can just go to the closet and see what the problem is.

They can come into your CAS and access it via RPC/HTTPS
having a cas in a remote site without a mailbox server is not beneficial
the cas server in TN will get the HTTPS request and redirect it to the FL cas server because Exchnage will always use the CAS server in the same AD site as the mialbox server
the cas in the remote office wouldn't be doing much other than costing money
Avatar of NeoGenomics

ASKER

so the ideal solution will be ,have a Mailbox and a CAS in each remote site (and also have an AD site in each site: FL,primary and the other two sites secondaries.)
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Avatar of Akhater
Akhater
Flag of Lebanon image

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
i'm with @akhater
i would rather build a centralized datacenter with redundant systems than spreading myself out without redundancy

but it all depends on the bandwidth between offices
That is our problem.We do not have enough BW in the remote sites...big traffic printing,copying files scanning to folders...(and all the destinations are here in FL),so we would like to save every possible bytes/s.
About Redundancy,we will do Exchange cluster in Florida for Hub and Mailbox.

Please let me know what you would do...Thansk!!
If you are thin on bandwidth, then its preferable to have a consolidated data center in florida as suggested
here http:#33648237, here http:#33648596 and here http:#33648643

unless there is something else in the mix which we dont know, but as far as emails are concerned, you are better off centralizing in florida data center and have users connect to that using RPC/HTTPS
well another thing to consider is the volume of emails between the members of the same site vs volume inter-site.

if the members of the same site usually communicate a lot with members of other sites then putting a local mailbox wouldn't save a lot of bandwidth since emails will need to go back and forth in all cases.

if you can afford having cas/hub/mailbox in each site then it is not a bad solution at all
in that case, you probably want to consider a single server in the outer offices that hosts all 3 roles
do the outer offices have internet access?
yes they have internet Access endital1097
i meant internet access locally, not thru fla
if so, centralized is definitely the way to go and use outlook anywhere
I still vote for centralization
i think it's a majority, anyone opposed
so all 3 votes for centralization :)
--
I dont see anyone else here..
Yes,They have to come to Florida for internet Access.

So the solution would be:

Exchange Cluster: (2 Nodes) -HUB and MailBox
1 Virtual server (CAS)

Everything in Florida????

sorry about my questions!!!! :)
it would more likely be

2 nodes HUB-Mailbox

2 CAS servers with NLB (to be fully redundant)

yes all in Florida

Good luck
Can be the CAS vitual machines?

thanks
i would go with 2010 to utilize the DAG which allows multiple roles
this would give your mailbox and hub roles redundancy

the other two servers as CAS
yes, cas could be virtual
< -- with akhater ^^^

How many servers do you have
what hardware configs / RAID / ram
what are you virtualizing and what are you keeping on bare metal ?
SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
I'd go with exchange 2010 - if you havent purchased the licenses already @ for 2007
Last question I guess.

We are thinking(just approved the budget) to put a physical server with Hyper-V  in one of our sites.We are thinking to put a DC,DNS,DHCP.It would make a secondary AD site up there.Make sense now to have a CAS in this site? I have to install a Mailbox Role right?

thanks
i see no advantages for a cas without a mailbox/hub in a remote site
yes, like we stated earlier, exchange cas will redirect the user to a cas server in the same site as the mailbox server
cas will have to be in the same site as mailbox - otherwise all your queries will be travelling over to Florida == end result really slow exchange for end users.
Following your comments:

So ,only Mailbox Role can be clustered?

Thanks
with 2007 yes
Other question:

I have Exchange 2007 Standard SP2.I read I can cluster using it?

also if I install windows SP3 will let me do the cluster in W2k8 R2.Is that true?
sp3 is required for 2008 R2
so making conclusions!!!


Cluster of Mailbox Server 1 Active and  (2 Nodes)

NLB of HUB and CAS (2 Nodes)


All centralized in FLorida.

Is that correct my friendS?????
yes this is it :)

2010 would be better if not available 2007 sp3 running on windows 2008 SP2 or R2
ok i am out for the day in 10-15 mins - I hope you are all set.

config's ok.
What happen is I do not check the option "Active/Passive clustered node" when I am installing Exchange and I select independently MailBox Role,Hub Transport Role and CAS Role in both nodes and I add both servers or nodes to the Failover Cluster Console.Is that make sense?

Is there any type of Failover cluster enviroment here?

Thansk
no you can't in Exchange 2007 you have to install them as a cluster to start with
The problem is we only have two physical servers and we were planning to make redundancy or failover cluster as we have done with SQL and FILE Servers.

thansk
your 2 physical servers will be the mailbox server then add 2 hyperV images as CAS/HUB as you said earlier
did you already purchase 2007 and that's why you are avoiding 2010
Hi All,

I built my exchange nodes with Windows 2008 Ent R2 and I installed Exchange SP3 and I used my standard Exchange w/SP1 license key.Now it says I have to have an Enterprise key to make clustered Mailbox.Is that true? I read in this discussion I was able to do it using my Standard edition.

Now I uninstalled SP3 and I am going to install Exchange w/SP1 ,after that SP2 and then SP3.Do you think it should work? Please advise! Thanks!