2010 exchange centralize mailstore?

  • Thread starter IlyaD
  • Start date Views 778
I

IlyaD

#1
We have 5 sites all connected by MPLS (6M pipe at datcenter, 3M at each site). 3 sites are all consolidated on one mailstore (exchange 2003), the other two sites have their own back-end mailstore on site. These locations are small (less then 20 users at each), but are for our executive team and wished for them to have "faster" access to their mailbox.
We are now planning our 2003 to 2010 exchange migration, and I wonder if it would be better to consolidate on one single mailstore (total users 300). Any suggestions? Any experience with exchange 2010 compared to 2003 in terms of performance when accessing the mailbox across the WAN utilizing outlook?
Just don't want to migrate to our exact setup if it is no longer the preferred route. Suggestions/advice welcome!!!
Thanks
 
O

OliverMoazzezi [MVP]

#2
A 3meg pipe, providing it isn't in high contention with existing services, should be more than enough to service 20 users connecting to a remote Exchange 2010 Server.

Here's a great article on client bandwidth for Exchange 2007, but still applies to 2010.

http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2008/04/10/448668.aspx

You still have other questions that will need answering, re: design, AD Site design, mail flow etc.

OliverOliver Moazzezi | Exchange MVP, MCSA:M, MCTS:Exchange 2010, BA (Hons) Anim | http://www.exchange2007.com | http://www.exchange2010.com | http://www.cobweb.com |
 
A

Alex Malkiman

#3
It is not just a function of bandwidth, but also latency between sites. Version of Outlook plays a huge role
We had poor performance with EX2003, Outlook 2003 NY to LA (about 75ms round trip ping time)
After upgrade to EX2007 and Outlook 2007, most issues were resolved. We have a lot more users so our problems were I/O related and latency

In your case you should also consider OWA with Exchange 2007 and 2010. It is so good, your users may not need outlook fat client at all.
It is also easier to WAN accelerage HTTP traffic compared to MAPI if you want to do this long term

So option 1 for you
Exchange 2007/2010 with Outlook 2007 all centralized, cached mode
Exchange 2007/2010 with Outlook 2007 for low latency sites and OWA for high latency sites

Alex
 
I

IlyaD

#5
Thanks to all for your advice. Nice to see some resources and real-life expereince with the product!!
 
B

Brian Day MCITP [MVP]

#6
The beautiful thing with 2010 if you wanted to is you can provide a copy of their mailbox database locally and with a DAG have a copy of that database at your central location meaning you could perform all of your backups at that one location. Then for remote access your branch offices could either all have their own URLs or you can set the ExternalURL values blank and force a CAS-CAS proxy so they all share a common URL.Brian Day, Overall Exchange & AD Geek
MCSA 2000/2003, CCNA
MCITP: Enterprise Messaging Administrator 2010
 
I

IlyaD

#7
Really?? Wow, now that seems like an amazing prospect! How would licensing work? I imagine I would need to buy an Exchange server license for each location then...however that server would only be a database for the branch office?
Definitely a great concept! This will be the first design overhaul we have done on our exchange infrastructure since we installed exchange 6 years ago...if I am doing the work..just want to do it right with all the new technologies implemented in 2007 and 2010.
Thanks again.
 
B

Brian Day MCITP [MVP]

#8
It would require an Exchange Server license (Standard or Enterprise depends on your needs) and a Windows Server 2008 or 2008 R2 Enterprise license (because you need Failover Clustering).Brian Day, Overall Exchange & AD Geek
MCSA 2000/2003, CCNA
MCITP: Enterprise Messaging Administrator 2010
 
I

IlyaD

#9
Ouch! The enterprise edition definitely puts it out of my price range as 4 exchange servers with enterprise edition 2008 would add $16,000 to the cost. A lot of money for less then 20 users!
Great idea though...just too rich for my blood! haha
Thanks
 

Similar threads

Top