iamuser
asked on
Exchange 2003 & 2010 routing group connector
I have 1 exchange 2003 server and after installing 2010 I notice the following
Routing group from EXCH 2003 EMS shows:
2k3 connector folder shows a connector pointed to our smarthost.
2k10 connector folder is emtpy
So no routing connectors between 2k3 to 2010 or 2010 to 2k3
Based on this I'm assuming users with mailboxes on the 2k3 won't be able to send email to users with mailboxes on 2010. The question is do I create the connector in exchange 2010 using the New-RoutingGroupConnector?
And if so do I need to do it twice? Meaning:
New-RoutingGroupConnector -Name "2010-2003" -SourceTransportServers "2010server.example.com" -TargetTransportServers "2003.example.com" -Cost 1 -Bidirectional $false -PublicFolderReferralsEnab led $true
New-RoutingGroupConnector -Name "2010-2003" -SourceTransportServers "2003server.example.com" -TargetTransportServers "2010.example.com" -Cost 1 -Bidirectional $false -PublicFolderReferralsEnab led $true
In 2010 I see 1 send connector by default. It's pointed to our smart host with no source address. I was inform that I will need to put in another send connector. Should this send connector be to the 2k3 box or the our Smarthost?
Routing group from EXCH 2003 EMS shows:
2k3 connector folder shows a connector pointed to our smarthost.
2k10 connector folder is emtpy
So no routing connectors between 2k3 to 2010 or 2010 to 2k3
Based on this I'm assuming users with mailboxes on the 2k3 won't be able to send email to users with mailboxes on 2010. The question is do I create the connector in exchange 2010 using the New-RoutingGroupConnector?
And if so do I need to do it twice? Meaning:
New-RoutingGroupConnector -Name "2010-2003" -SourceTransportServers "2010server.example.com" -TargetTransportServers "2003.example.com" -Cost 1 -Bidirectional $false -PublicFolderReferralsEnab
New-RoutingGroupConnector -Name "2010-2003" -SourceTransportServers "2003server.example.com" -TargetTransportServers "2010.example.com" -Cost 1 -Bidirectional $false -PublicFolderReferralsEnab
In 2010 I see 1 send connector by default. It's pointed to our smart host with no source address. I was inform that I will need to put in another send connector. Should this send connector be to the 2k3 box or the our Smarthost?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Shouldn't I enable publicfolderreferrals as well? I have public folders in 2k3
>>>And this will create the connector so that users with mailboxes in 2003 can send to users with mailboxes in 2010
Yes it will.
thakurdinesh, that's pretty much what I already said!!!
Yes it will.
thakurdinesh, that's pretty much what I already said!!!
>>Shouldn't I enable publicfolderreferrals as well? I have public folders in 2k3
Yes, which is why I didn't change the command!
Yes, which is why I didn't change the command!
Yes the command will work fine. Remember to add all the frontend servers and transport servers on source and target side as well.
Yes you should add that switch as well for public folder referrals.
thakurdinesh, It's rude to repeat other peoples posts at a feable attempt to gain points. If you have nothing to add then please refrain from posting. Read ALL previous posts before you do!
ASKER
"Remember to add all the frontend servers and transport servers on source and target side as well."
Do you mean that I should add the FE servers and transports servers as members to the new routing group? Won't that take them out of the old routing group? won't that cause a problem?
Do you mean that I should add the FE servers and transports servers as members to the new routing group? Won't that take them out of the old routing group? won't that cause a problem?
That is wrong, you don't need to do this, the command that you posted in your question but change bidirectional to true is sufficient.
It doesn't need to be overcomplicated.
It doesn't need to be overcomplicated.
ASKER
okay,
ASKER
Just 1 more thing, in the command, can the source be the FQDN of the cas array or does it have to be the FQDN of the actual server?
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
thank you
>>>>That is wrong, you don't need to do this, the command that you posted in your question but change >>>>bidirectional to true is sufficient.
>>>>It doesn't need to be overcomplicated.
If you have more than 2 hub servers and more than two frontend server you HAVE TO add all those servers name while creating RGC... Or else you would end up with queuing the messages on the HUB server that is not in RGC..
If you still have doubt? setup your own lab with two HUB and frontend server and you will find what I am talking about.
>>>>It doesn't need to be overcomplicated.
If you have more than 2 hub servers and more than two frontend server you HAVE TO add all those servers name while creating RGC... Or else you would end up with queuing the messages on the HUB server that is not in RGC..
If you still have doubt? setup your own lab with two HUB and frontend server and you will find what I am talking about.
I am not going to argue with you. You only need 1 connector between the 2003 org and the 2010 org.
The source servers are the same as the bridgehead server. If no others are in place then all 2010 servers will sendail to this server to be sent to the 2003 org.
The source servers are the same as the bridgehead server. If no others are in place then all 2010 servers will sendail to this server to be sent to the 2003 org.
ASKER
Guys I'm making a new thread so you can explain to me what you guys ate talking about. Right now I have 1 exchange back end server and 2 fe. And 1 exchange 2010 server. These are for 1 domain.
We will however be Adding another 2010 in the future for dag. So if there is something I should be aware of please let me know. I'll post the new link shortly with points
We will however be Adding another 2010 in the future for dag. So if there is something I should be aware of please let me know. I'll post the new link shortly with points
ASKER
link is below, I started a new question about the extra hub servers and such
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/26901844/Exchange-2003-2010-routing-group-connector-II.html
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/26901844/Exchange-2003-2010-routing-group-connector-II.html
ASKER
New-RoutingGroupConnector -Name "2010-2003" -SourceTransportServers "my.inside.domani.com" -TargetTransportServers "2003.inside.domain.com" -Cost 1 -Bidirectional $true -PublicFolderReferralsEnab
And this will create the connector so that users with mailboxes in 2003 can send to users with mailboxes in 2010