UCC for multi-location, multi-server Exchange 2010 environment

We are planning to implement a new Exchange 2010 environment that will consist of two offices (e.g. New York and Washington DC) with two HUB/CAS servers and two Mailbox servers at each location.  Now we are trying to determine the names to include on the UCC certificate.  Assume the internal domain name is abc.local and the external domain name is abc.com.  Below is a list of names to include on the UCC.

mail.abc.com (common name used for OWA, IMAP/POP3/SMTP and Exchange ActiveSync)

autodiscover.abc.com

DC Hub and CAS server internal addresses
DCHUBCAS001.abc.local
DCHUBCAS002.abc.local

DC mailbox server internal addresses
DCMBX01.abc.local
DCMBX02.abc.local

NY Hub and CAS server internal addresses
NYHUBCAS001.abc.local
NYHUBCAS002.abc.local

NY mailbox server internal addresses
NYMBX01.abc.local
NYMBX02.abc.local

DC Hub and CAS server internal addresses
DCHUBCAS001
DCHUBCAS002

DC mailbox server internal addresses
DCMBX01
DCMBX02

NY Hub and CAS server internal addresses
NYHUBCAS001
NYHUBCAS002

NY mailbox server internal addresses
NYMBX01
NYMBX02

First, I want to know if I am missing any names?

Second, do I need a UCC certificate on the mailbox servers?

Third, I want to know if I can use just one UCC for all my Exchange servers or if I will have to get a different UCC certificate for each location/server?  Are we able to use just mail.abc.com for OWA, IMAP/POP3/SMTP and Exchange ActiveSync even though users based in New York will need to be directed to one of the New York HUB/CAS servers and DC users will need to be directed to one of the DC HUB/CAS servers?  I have read that some clients/devices will have problems if the common name does not match the name used by the client/device.  If this is the case, will I need to create a UCC certificate with a common name of nymail.abc.com and dcmail.abc.com or nymail1.abc.com, nymail2.abc.com, dcmail1.abc.com and dcmail2.abc.com?
LVL 4
NGPSoft1Asked:
Who is Participating?
 
5g6tdcv4Commented:
Just for ease of use I would get a wildcard cert.
Here is a good link regarding the SAN certificate
1. not that I can see...verify with the following
 link http://blogs.catapultsystems.com/IT/archive/2010/02/17/exchange-2010-part-2-of-4-%E2%80%93-understanding-the-new-uc-san-certificate-requirement.aspx
2. No, only needed on the CAS
3. wildcard is your best bet
0
 
NGPSoft1Author Commented:
The problem with a widcard cert is that it will not cover both the internal and external domains.
0
 
NGPSoft1Author Commented:
We were able to resolve this issue a while ago but I forgot to update this question.

We attempted to use the wildcard certificate but it caused problems with VIPRE Email Security for Exchange, our 3rd party Exchange anti-virus and anti-spam solution.  The email security software was attempting to connect to the servers via the internal FQDN which the wildcard certificate does not cover.  In the end we went with a UCC certificate with the following Subject Alternative Names.

mail.abc.com (common name used for OWA, IMAP/POP3/SMTP and Exchange ActiveSync and usually redirects to a specific HUB/CAS server)

DC and NY HUB and CAS server public names
mail1.abc.com
mail2.abc.com

autodiscover.abc.com
autodiscover.abc.local

DC Hub and CAS server internal addresses
DCHUBCAS001.abc.local
DCHUBCAS002.abc.local

DC mailbox server internal addresses
DCMBX01.abc.local
DCMBX02.abc.local

NY Hub and CAS server internal addresses
NYHUBCAS001.abc.local
NYHUBCAS002.abc.local

NY mailbox server internal addresses
NYMBX01.abc.local
NYMBX02.abc.local

According to a Microsoft tech the NETBIOS names do not need to be included in the certificate.  We may not have needed to include the names of the mailbox servers but we included them just to be sure.

If it weren't for the email security software the wildcard certificate might have worked.
0
 
NGPSoft1Author Commented:
I am accepting 5g6tdcv4's comment as the best solution with full points as I think it will be the best solution in most situations but due to the fact that this solution did not work in our environment I also accepted my own solution which resolved the issue for us.
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.