| Author | Messages | |
eis_lists
Posts:34
 | | 04/26/2008 1:45 AM |
| Hello:
We are considering an Exchange 2007 deployment but are concerned about its
practical feasibility. We have four small offices with roughly 25 people in
each. Each office is in a different country, in some cases with very poor
connectivity between sites (very high latency). We would like to maintain a
single Internet domain name for email addressing (company.com), though some
have suggested separate domains for each country. The underlying AD
structure uses a single Forest and single Domain (company.local).
A single-server deployment test has failed miserably with Outlook taking
several minutes to send a single message with a small attachment using "RPC
over HTTPS". So now we are looking at servers in each location.
With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more efficient?
Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional
compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help
overcome the IP latency issues?)
With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need to
arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take advantage of
Calendar and Task sharing across sites? (They would still have the same AD
domain name.)
Many thanks.
-- nme
P.S. I've asked this question in a few other forums so apologies if someone
has seen this same question there.
| | | |
| deji
Posts:140
| | 04/26/2008 12:20 PM |
| >>> some have suggested separate domains for each country.
You mean multiple email domains, right? Because if you are talking AD domain, then that's an overkill.
>>> So now we are looking at servers in each location.
You can have servers in multiple locations even in the same domain and a single Exchange organization
>>> With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more efficient?
I don't see a correlation between the two.
>>> Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help overcome the IP latency issues?)
Using Exchange 2007 can somewhat compensate for the latency and improve communication, but the only thinf that can overcome your latency is to not have latency at all. As for replication efficiency, E2K7 does perform better than previous Exchange versions.
>>> With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need to arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
Not necessarily. You can have multiple points of entry, although there is no way (that I know of) to natively intercept and direct inbound emails to specific servers based on regions. I know that if you let some third-party providers host your MX records, they can use some rules to direct emails to specific servers for you. The advantage of this is that the providers have bigger pipes to your multiple locations, and they will send emails addressed to EU users directly to the server servicing EU instead of sending them to US server for onward delivery to the EU server.
Of course, you can also have one SMTP domain for each region and then publish the corresponding MX record for each domain to point to the server responsible for that region/domain. You can do this within one AD domain and one Exchange Org. This is less expensive than using the third-party option, but it means that you will have mutiple email domains.
>>> With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take advantage of Calendar and Task sharing across sites?
Yes. They are all within the same Exchange Org, so collaboration will happen.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.name<http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of EIS Lists [eis_lists@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 10:43 PM
To: Active Directory List
Subject: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
Hello:
We are considering an Exchange 2007 deployment but are concerned about its practical feasibility. We have four small offices with roughly 25 people in each. Each office is in a different country, in some cases with very poor connectivity between sites (very high latency). We would like to maintain a single Internet domain name for email addressing (company.com), though some have suggested separate domains for each country. The underlying AD structure uses a single Forest and single Domain (company.local).
A single-server deployment test has failed miserably with Outlook taking several minutes to send a single message with a small attachment using "RPC over HTTPS". So now we are looking at servers in each location.
With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more efficient? Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help overcome the IP latency issues?)
With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need to arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take advantage of Calendar and Task sharing across sites? (They would still have the same AD domain name.)
Many thanks.
-- nme
P.S. I’ve asked this question in a few other forums so apologies if someone has seen this same question there.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
| | | |
| eis_lists
Posts:34
| | 04/26/2008 1:41 PM |
| Thanks, Deji. Sorry if that was a bit confusing. We have been given this
"Exchange mandate," and I am skeptical that it will be worth the investment.
In all of that, I intend to keep the same AD domain. What I called "public
domains" you called SMTP domains -- that is, how the Internet sees the
domain. With multiple SMTP domains, mail from the Internet goes directly to
the server closest to the user's mailbox. However, am I correct that it also
must mean changes to each user's Internet email address? If we have
company.com and use multiple SMTP domains, jdoe@company.com must become
jdoe@company.com.us and jsmith@company.com must become jsmith@company.fr.
Right? There is no way keep the single public domain name, right?
Thanks.
-- nme
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 9:19 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
>>> some have suggested separate domains for each country.
You mean multiple email domains, right? Because if you are talking AD
domain, then that's an overkill.
>>> So now we are looking at servers in each location.
You can have servers in multiple locations even in the same domain and a
single Exchange organization
>>> With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more
efficient?
I don't see a correlation between the two.
>>> Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional
compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help
overcome the IP latency issues?)
Using Exchange 2007 can somewhat compensate for the latency and improve
communication, but the only thinf that can overcome your latency is to not
have latency at all. As for replication efficiency, E2K7 does perform better
than previous Exchange versions.
>>> With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need
to arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
Not necessarily. You can have multiple points of entry, although there is no
way (that I know of) to natively intercept and direct inbound emails to
specific servers based on regions. I know that if you let some third-party
providers host your MX records, they can use some rules to direct emails to
specific servers for you. The advantage of this is that the providers have
bigger pipes to your multiple locations, and they will send emails addressed
to EU users directly to the server servicing EU instead of sending them to
US server for onward delivery to the EU server.
Of course, you can also have one SMTP domain for each region and then
publish the corresponding MX record for each domain to point to the server
responsible for that region/domain. You can do this within one AD domain and
one Exchange Org. This is less expensive than using the third-party option,
but it means that you will have mutiple email domains.
>>> With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take
advantage of Calendar and Task sharing across sites?
Yes. They are all within the same Exchange Org, so collaboration will
happen.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.name<http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of EIS Lists
[eis_lists@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 10:43 PM
To: Active Directory List
Subject: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
Hello:
We are considering an Exchange 2007 deployment but are concerned about its
practical feasibility. We have four small offices with roughly 25 people in
each. Each office is in a different country, in some cases with very poor
connectivity between sites (very high latency). We would like to maintain a
single Internet domain name for email addressing (company.com), though some
have suggested separate domains for each country. The underlying AD
structure uses a single Forest and single Domain (company.local).
A single-server deployment test has failed miserably with Outlook taking
several minutes to send a single message with a small attachment using "RPC
over HTTPS". So now we are looking at servers in each location.
With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more efficient?
Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional
compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help
overcome the IP latency issues?)
With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need to
arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take advantage of
Calendar and Task sharing across sites? (They would still have the same AD
domain name.)
Many thanks.
-- nme
P.S. I've asked this question in a few other forums so apologies if someone
has seen this same question there.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
| | | |
| deji
Posts:140
| | 04/26/2008 5:38 PM |
| The MAJOR problem is connectivity among the regions, right? So, you want to ensure that mails for users in France does not go to the Hub/Edge server in Hong Kong who will then route it to the mailbox server in France. Correct?
There is nothing (that I know of) in E2K7 that does this for you out of the box IF you use one single SMTP domain.
There are third-party messaging service provider that have the capabilities to help you put some routing logic in your inbound mail traffic to accomplish this, using one SMTP Domain. Of course, the provider will host your MX records, and they are not very cheap.
Natively, you will have to segment the Exchange org by having multiple SMTP domain as you have described. The people in France will have company.fr, the ones in Djibouti will be company.dj (or they could all be companyFR.com, CompanyDJ.com, CompanyUS.com, you get the idea). Then you will locate one or 2 SMTP servers in each region and publish the MX for each SMTP domain to point to the server located there (for the size of the enterprise you've described, one is enough, but then you expose yourself to a single-point-of-failure situation).
You will still be able to use a common email address (commoncompanyname.whatever) IN ADDITION tot the regional SMTP addresses IF that is important to you. However, if email is addressed to bigdudeinRussia@commoncompanyname.whatever, that email is NOT guraranteed to go FIRST to the SMTP server in Russia (you are back to the beginning of our original loop).
I hope I haven't confused you too much.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.name - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon
________________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of EIS Lists [eis_lists@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 10:36 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
Thanks, Deji. Sorry if that was a bit confusing. We have been given this
"Exchange mandate," and I am skeptical that it will be worth the investment.
In all of that, I intend to keep the same AD domain. What I called "public
domains" you called SMTP domains -- that is, how the Internet sees the
domain. With multiple SMTP domains, mail from the Internet goes directly to
the server closest to the user's mailbox. However, am I correct that it also
must mean changes to each user's Internet email address? If we have
company.com and use multiple SMTP domains, jdoe@company.com must become
jdoe@company.com.us and jsmith@company.com must become jsmith@company.fr.
Right? There is no way keep the single public domain name, right?
Thanks.
-- nme
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 9:19 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
>>> some have suggested separate domains for each country.
You mean multiple email domains, right? Because if you are talking AD
domain, then that's an overkill.
>>> So now we are looking at servers in each location.
You can have servers in multiple locations even in the same domain and a
single Exchange organization
>>> With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more
efficient?
I don't see a correlation between the two.
>>> Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional
compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help
overcome the IP latency issues?)
Using Exchange 2007 can somewhat compensate for the latency and improve
communication, but the only thinf that can overcome your latency is to not
have latency at all. As for replication efficiency, E2K7 does perform better
than previous Exchange versions.
>>> With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need
to arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
Not necessarily. You can have multiple points of entry, although there is no
way (that I know of) to natively intercept and direct inbound emails to
specific servers based on regions. I know that if you let some third-party
providers host your MX records, they can use some rules to direct emails to
specific servers for you. The advantage of this is that the providers have
bigger pipes to your multiple locations, and they will send emails addressed
to EU users directly to the server servicing EU instead of sending them to
US server for onward delivery to the EU server.
Of course, you can also have one SMTP domain for each region and then
publish the corresponding MX record for each domain to point to the server
responsible for that region/domain. You can do this within one AD domain and
one Exchange Org. This is less expensive than using the third-party option,
but it means that you will have mutiple email domains.
>>> With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take
advantage of Calendar and Task sharing across sites?
Yes. They are all within the same Exchange Org, so collaboration will
happen.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.name<http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of EIS Lists
[eis_lists@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 10:43 PM
To: Active Directory List
Subject: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
Hello:
We are considering an Exchange 2007 deployment but are concerned about its
practical feasibility. We have four small offices with roughly 25 people in
each. Each office is in a different country, in some cases with very poor
connectivity between sites (very high latency). We would like to maintain a
single Internet domain name for email addressing (company.com), though some
have suggested separate domains for each country. The underlying AD
structure uses a single Forest and single Domain (company.local).
A single-server deployment test has failed miserably with Outlook taking
several minutes to send a single message with a small attachment using "RPC
over HTTPS". So now we are looking at servers in each location.
With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more efficient?
Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional
compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help
overcome the IP latency issues?)
With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need to
arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take advantage of
Calendar and Task sharing across sites? (They would still have the same AD
domain name.)
Many thanks.
-- nme
P.S. I've asked this question in a few other forums so apologies if someone
has seen this same question there.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
| | | |
| kevinbrunson
Posts:44
| | 04/28/2008 10:06 AM |
| Why not go with us.company.com, fr.company.com, etc, instead of company.com.us. Keeps it all within the hierarchy of the single public domain name. You could give each user both email addresses, so if someone sends an email to jdoe@company.com, the email would be sent to your primary location, where Exchange could eventually route it to the correct location, but if they sent it to jdoe@fr.company.com, then it would go straight to the correct location. That would keep a lot of the intra-site traffic down, while still allowing for the email sender who is incapable of typing in the correct email address.
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of EIS Lists
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 12:37 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
Thanks, Deji. Sorry if that was a bit confusing. We have been given this
"Exchange mandate," and I am skeptical that it will be worth the investment.
In all of that, I intend to keep the same AD domain. What I called "public
domains" you called SMTP domains -- that is, how the Internet sees the
domain. With multiple SMTP domains, mail from the Internet goes directly to
the server closest to the user's mailbox. However, am I correct that it also
must mean changes to each user's Internet email address? If we have
company.com and use multiple SMTP domains, jdoe@company.com must become
jdoe@company.com.us and jsmith@company.com must become jsmith@company.fr.
Right? There is no way keep the single public domain name, right?
Thanks.
-- nme
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 9:19 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
>>> some have suggested separate domains for each country.
You mean multiple email domains, right? Because if you are talking AD
domain, then that's an overkill.
>>> So now we are looking at servers in each location.
You can have servers in multiple locations even in the same domain and a
single Exchange organization
>>> With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more
efficient?
I don't see a correlation between the two.
>>> Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional
compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help
overcome the IP latency issues?)
Using Exchange 2007 can somewhat compensate for the latency and improve
communication, but the only thinf that can overcome your latency is to not
have latency at all. As for replication efficiency, E2K7 does perform better
than previous Exchange versions.
>>> With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need
to arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
Not necessarily. You can have multiple points of entry, although there is no
way (that I know of) to natively intercept and direct inbound emails to
specific servers based on regions. I know that if you let some third-party
providers host your MX records, they can use some rules to direct emails to
specific servers for you. The advantage of this is that the providers have
bigger pipes to your multiple locations, and they will send emails addressed
to EU users directly to the server servicing EU instead of sending them to
US server for onward delivery to the EU server.
Of course, you can also have one SMTP domain for each region and then
publish the corresponding MX record for each domain to point to the server
responsible for that region/domain. You can do this within one AD domain and
one Exchange Org. This is less expensive than using the third-party option,
but it means that you will have mutiple email domains.
>>> With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take
advantage of Calendar and Task sharing across sites?
Yes. They are all within the same Exchange Org, so collaboration will
happen.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.name<http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of EIS Lists
[eis_lists@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 10:43 PM
To: Active Directory List
Subject: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
Hello:
We are considering an Exchange 2007 deployment but are concerned about its
practical feasibility. We have four small offices with roughly 25 people in
each. Each office is in a different country, in some cases with very poor
connectivity between sites (very high latency). We would like to maintain a
single Internet domain name for email addressing (company.com), though some
have suggested separate domains for each country. The underlying AD
structure uses a single Forest and single Domain (company.local).
A single-server deployment test has failed miserably with Outlook taking
several minutes to send a single message with a small attachment using "RPC
over HTTPS". So now we are looking at servers in each location.
With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more efficient?
Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional
compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help
overcome the IP latency issues?)
With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need to
arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take advantage of
Calendar and Task sharing across sites? (They would still have the same AD
domain name.)
Many thanks.
-- nme
P.S. I've asked this question in a few other forums so apologies if someone
has seen this same question there.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
| | | |
| eis_lists
Posts:34
| | 04/28/2008 12:58 PM |
| Thanks. That is indeed simpler.
I appreciate all the thoughts on this.
-- nme
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Brunson
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 7:07 AM
To: 'ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org'
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
Why not go with us.company.com, fr.company.com, etc, instead of
company.com.us. Keeps it all within the hierarchy of the single public
domain name. You could give each user both email addresses, so if someone
sends an email to jdoe@company.com, the email would be sent to your primary
location, where Exchange could eventually route it to the correct location,
but if they sent it to jdoe@fr.company.com, then it would go straight to the
correct location. That would keep a lot of the intra-site traffic down,
while still allowing for the email sender who is incapable of typing in the
correct email address.
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of EIS Lists
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 12:37 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
Thanks, Deji. Sorry if that was a bit confusing. We have been given this
"Exchange mandate," and I am skeptical that it will be worth the investment.
In all of that, I intend to keep the same AD domain. What I called "public
domains" you called SMTP domains -- that is, how the Internet sees the
domain. With multiple SMTP domains, mail from the Internet goes directly to
the server closest to the user's mailbox. However, am I correct that it also
must mean changes to each user's Internet email address? If we have
company.com and use multiple SMTP domains, jdoe@company.com must become
jdoe@company.com.us and jsmith@company.com must become jsmith@company.fr.
Right? There is no way keep the single public domain name, right?
Thanks.
-- nme
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 9:19 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
>>> some have suggested separate domains for each country.
You mean multiple email domains, right? Because if you are talking AD
domain, then that's an overkill.
>>> So now we are looking at servers in each location.
You can have servers in multiple locations even in the same domain and a
single Exchange organization
>>> With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more
efficient?
I don't see a correlation between the two.
>>> Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional
compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help
overcome the IP latency issues?)
Using Exchange 2007 can somewhat compensate for the latency and improve
communication, but the only thinf that can overcome your latency is to not
have latency at all. As for replication efficiency, E2K7 does perform better
than previous Exchange versions.
>>> With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need
to arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
Not necessarily. You can have multiple points of entry, although there is no
way (that I know of) to natively intercept and direct inbound emails to
specific servers based on regions. I know that if you let some third-party
providers host your MX records, they can use some rules to direct emails to
specific servers for you. The advantage of this is that the providers have
bigger pipes to your multiple locations, and they will send emails addressed
to EU users directly to the server servicing EU instead of sending them to
US server for onward delivery to the EU server.
Of course, you can also have one SMTP domain for each region and then
publish the corresponding MX record for each domain to point to the server
responsible for that region/domain. You can do this within one AD domain and
one Exchange Org. This is less expensive than using the third-party option,
but it means that you will have mutiple email domains.
>>> With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take
advantage of Calendar and Task sharing across sites?
Yes. They are all within the same Exchange Org, so collaboration will
happen.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.name<http://www.akomolafe.name/> - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of EIS Lists
[eis_lists@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 10:43 PM
To: Active Directory List
Subject: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange 2007 Multisite Design Question
Hello:
We are considering an Exchange 2007 deployment but are concerned about its
practical feasibility. We have four small offices with roughly 25 people in
each. Each office is in a different country, in some cases with very poor
connectivity between sites (very high latency). We would like to maintain a
single Internet domain name for email addressing (company.com), though some
have suggested separate domains for each country. The underlying AD
structure uses a single Forest and single Domain (company.local).
A single-server deployment test has failed miserably with Outlook taking
several minutes to send a single message with a small attachment using "RPC
over HTTPS". So now we are looking at servers in each location.
With a single public domain name, is traffic between sites more efficient?
Using single instances for multiple recipients? Is there any additional
compression or improvement between sites? (Basically, would this help
overcome the IP latency issues?)
With a single public domain name, would all mail from the Internet need to
arrive at a single point and then get distributed by Exchange?
With multiple public domains, would users still be able to take advantage of
Calendar and Task sharing across sites? (They would still have the same AD
domain name.)
Many thanks.
-- nme
P.S. I've asked this question in a few other forums so apologies if someone
has seen this same question there.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ma/default.aspx
| | | |
|
|