| Author | Messages | |
derek.rose
Posts:0
 | | 07/27/2010 1:48 PM |
| Hi List,
I'm still digging through the Exchange 2010 documentation, but wanted to see if there was any input on a HA solution for CAS across multiple sites. If I'm understanding correctly, you can use a CAS Array which would provide a HA solution as long as those CAS servers are in the same site. I'm going to setup a DAG that will have MBXA/CASA/HUBA in Site A and have MBXB/CASB/HUBB in Site B. This should suit pretty much all my needs and I can failover the DAG with little to no issue or user interruption.
I need to look into Auto discover a little more to see how I can handle this - but has anyone dug into this deeper to see what the options are? I think Outlook itself should function OK (I think), but would be more concerned about users who need to access OWA and for Mobile Devices. I think if the CAS Array functionality would be expanded to support multiple AD sites then I'd be golden!
Derek
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
| | | |
| michael1
Posts:426
| | 07/27/2010 2:51 PM |
| A CAS array, by itself, is insufficient within a site - you also need NLB or
a HW LB.
A separate site will need a separate namespace. Autodiscover will direct
based on the location of the user's mailbox (but that obviously doesn't
apply to things like OWA/etc. that aren't autodiscover directed). True site
failover, including namespace failover, requires manual intervention (i.e.,
DNS changes).
There may be upper-end network equipment that can handle the site changes
automagically, but I'm not aware of them.
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Derek Rose
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 8:47 AM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Hi List,
I'm still digging through the Exchange 2010 documentation, but wanted to see
if there was any input on a HA solution for CAS across multiple sites. If
I'm understanding correctly, you can use a CAS Array which would provide a
HA solution as long as those CAS servers are in the same site. I'm going to
setup a DAG that will have MBXA/CASA/HUBA in Site A and have MBXB/CASB/HUBB
in Site B. This should suit pretty much all my needs and I can failover the
DAG with little to no issue or user interruption.
I need to look into Auto discover a little more to see how I can handle this
- but has anyone dug into this deeper to see what the options are? I think
Outlook itself should function OK (I think), but would be more concerned
about users who need to access OWA and for Mobile Devices. I think if the
CAS Array functionality would be expanded to support multiple AD sites then
I'd be golden!
Derek
_____
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is
covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521,
and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and
may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution
is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If
you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication
through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
| | | |
| RobSilver
Posts:0
| | 07/27/2010 7:43 PM |
| What is the BW between the sites? You can extend a VLAN between the sites and use NLB if the bandwidth is sufficient (100/1000mbps).
Regards,
Rob Silver<http://robsilver.org/>
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Derek Rose
Sent: 27 July 2010 1:44 PM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Hi List,
I'm still digging through the Exchange 2010 documentation, but wanted to see if there was any input on a HA solution for CAS across multiple sites. If I'm understanding correctly, you can use a CAS Array which would provide a HA solution as long as those CAS servers are in the same site. I'm going to setup a DAG that will have MBXA/CASA/HUBA in Site A and have MBXB/CASB/HUBB in Site B. This should suit pretty much all my needs and I can failover the DAG with little to no issue or user interruption.
I need to look into Auto discover a little more to see how I can handle this - but has anyone dug into this deeper to see what the options are? I think Outlook itself should function OK (I think), but would be more concerned about users who need to access OWA and for Mobile Devices. I think if the CAS Array functionality would be expanded to support multiple AD sites then I'd be golden!
Derek
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
| | | |
| derek.rose
Posts:0
| | 07/27/2010 8:07 PM |
| Yes we have a T3 between sites, however our network is not currently extended and they are on different VLANs. It's a project we have talked about for a long time but never really followed up on.
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of [Infraspec] Rob Silver
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 2:35 PM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
What is the BW between the sites? You can extend a VLAN between the sites and use NLB if the bandwidth is sufficient (100/1000mbps).
Regards,
Rob Silver<http://robsilver.org/>
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Derek Rose
Sent: 27 July 2010 1:44 PM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Hi List,
I'm still digging through the Exchange 2010 documentation, but wanted to see if there was any input on a HA solution for CAS across multiple sites. If I'm understanding correctly, you can use a CAS Array which would provide a HA solution as long as those CAS servers are in the same site. I'm going to setup a DAG that will have MBXA/CASA/HUBA in Site A and have MBXB/CASB/HUBB in Site B. This should suit pretty much all my needs and I can failover the DAG with little to no issue or user interruption.
I need to look into Auto discover a little more to see how I can handle this - but has anyone dug into this deeper to see what the options are? I think Outlook itself should function OK (I think), but would be more concerned about users who need to access OWA and for Mobile Devices. I think if the CAS Array functionality would be expanded to support multiple AD sites then I'd be golden!
Derek
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
| | | |
| RobSilver
Posts:0
| | 07/27/2010 9:07 PM |
| It's not too difficult to extend a VLAN across the 2 sites (i.e. 1 subnet) and use NLB for your CAS servers. Additional VLANs are also great for a heartbeat connections for your DAGs and NLB CASs. If you can get the networking right, this works like a charm. Your Cisco guys need to do a bit of head scratching, but I have done this at 2 customers and it's very solid.
Add on 2 TMG servers behind ASAs with HSRP in each site, 2 ISP connections to each site connected to the ASAs and ISP redundancy on the TMG servers. 2 MX servers in the DMZs between the ASA and TMG servers with different MX preferences (if necessary). And BGP.
Great solution for SMEs with reliable connectivity to the DR site/s.
What's missing?
Rob Silver<http://robsilver.org/>
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Derek Rose
Sent: 27 July 2010 8:03 PM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Yes we have a T3 between sites, however our network is not currently extended and they are on different VLANs. It's a project we have talked about for a long time but never really followed up on.
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of [Infraspec] Rob Silver
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 2:35 PM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
What is the BW between the sites? You can extend a VLAN between the sites and use NLB if the bandwidth is sufficient (100/1000mbps).
Regards,
Rob Silver<http://robsilver.org/>
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Derek Rose
Sent: 27 July 2010 1:44 PM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Hi List,
I'm still digging through the Exchange 2010 documentation, but wanted to see if there was any input on a HA solution for CAS across multiple sites. If I'm understanding correctly, you can use a CAS Array which would provide a HA solution as long as those CAS servers are in the same site. I'm going to setup a DAG that will have MBXA/CASA/HUBA in Site A and have MBXB/CASB/HUBB in Site B. This should suit pretty much all my needs and I can failover the DAG with little to no issue or user interruption.
I need to look into Auto discover a little more to see how I can handle this - but has anyone dug into this deeper to see what the options are? I think Outlook itself should function OK (I think), but would be more concerned about users who need to access OWA and for Mobile Devices. I think if the CAS Array functionality would be expanded to support multiple AD sites then I'd be golden!
Derek
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
| | | |
| Bitzie
Posts:251
| | 07/27/2010 9:11 PM |
| <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
The budget for such a solution. M's maybe. S's? Not the ones I deal
with...too cheap.
[Infraspec] Rob Silver wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:1B6DE1D73115324DAE23BEB9F26BBF260464E567@srvlad11.private.menshen.net"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">It’s not
too difficult to extend a VLAN across the 2 sites (i.e. 1 subnet) and
use NLB for your CAS servers. Additional VLANs are also great for a
heartbeat connections for your DAGs and NLB CASs. If you can get the
networking right, this works like a charm. Your Cisco guys need to do
a bit of head scratching, but I have done this at 2 customers and it’s
very solid.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Add on 2
TMG servers behind ASAs with HSRP in each site, 2 ISP connections to
each site connected to the ASAs and ISP redundancy on the TMG servers.
2 MX servers in the DMZs between the ASA and TMG servers with different
MX preferences (if necessary). And BGP.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Great
solution for SMEs with reliable connectivity to the DR site/s.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">What’s
missing? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://robsilver.org/"><span
style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-decoration: none;">Rob Silver</span></a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div
style="border-style: solid none none; border-color: rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt medium medium; padding: 3pt 0cm 0cm;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";"
lang="EN-US"> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="javascript:window.location.replace('ma'+'ilto:'+'activedir-owner'+'@'+'mail'+'.activedir')".org">activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="javascript:window.location.replace('ma'+'ilto:'+'activedir-owner'+'@'+'mail'+'.activedir')".org">mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Derek
Rose
<b>Sent:</b> 27 July 2010 8:03 PM
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="javascript:window.location.replace('ma'+'ilto:'+'activedir'+'@'+'mail'+'.activedir')".org">activedir@mail.activedir.org</a>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS
HA<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"
lang="EN-US">Yes we have a T3 between sites, however our network is
not currently extended and they are on different VLANs. It’s a project
we have talked about for a long time but never really followed up on.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"
lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div
style="border-style: solid none none; border-color: rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt medium medium; padding: 3pt 0cm 0cm;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";"
lang="EN-US"> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="javascript:window.location.replace('ma'+'ilto:'+'activedir-owner'+'@'+'mail'+'.activedir')".org">activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="javascript:window.location.replace('ma'+'ilto:'+'activedir-owner'+'@'+'mail'+'.activedir')".org">mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>[Infraspec]
Rob Silver
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 27, 2010 2:35 PM
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="javascript:window.location.replace('ma'+'ilto:'+'activedir'+'@'+'mail'+'.activedir')".org">activedir@mail.activedir.org</a>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS
HA<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">What is
the BW between the sites? You can extend a VLAN between the sites and
use NLB if the bandwidth is sufficient (100/1000mbps). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Regards, <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://robsilver.org/"><span
style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-decoration: none;">Rob Silver</span></a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div
style="border-style: solid none none; border-color: rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt medium medium; padding: 3pt 0cm 0cm;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";"
lang="EN-US"> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="javascript:window.location.replace('ma'+'ilto:'+'activedir-owner'+'@'+'mail'+'.activedir')".org">activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="javascript:window.location.replace('ma'+'ilto:'+'activedir-owner'+'@'+'mail'+'.activedir')".org">mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Derek
Rose
<b>Sent:</b> 27 July 2010 1:44 PM
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="javascript:window.location.replace('ma'+'ilto:'+'activedir'+'@'+'mail'+'.activedir')".org">activedir@mail.activedir.org</a>
<b>Subject:</b> [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Hi List,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I’m still digging through the
Exchange 2010 documentation, but wanted to see if there was any input
on a HA solution for CAS across multiple sites. If I’m understanding
correctly, you can use a CAS Array which would provide a HA solution as
long as those CAS servers are in the same site. I’m going to setup a
DAG that will have MBXA/CASA/HUBA in Site A and have MBXB/CASB/HUBB in
Site B. This should suit pretty much all my needs and I can failover
the DAG with little to no issue or user interruption. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I need to look into Auto
discover a little more to see how I can handle this – but has anyone
dug into this deeper to see what the options are? I think Outlook
itself should function OK (I think), but would be more concerned about
users who need to access OWA and for Mobile Devices. I think if the
CAS Array functionality would be expanded to support multiple AD sites
then I’d be golden!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Derek<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"
lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"
lang="EN-US">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%"></span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size: 7.5pt; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; color: gray;"
lang="EN-US">CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including
attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination,
copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended
recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium,
please so advise the sender immediately.</span><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"
lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"
lang="EN-US">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%"></span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size: 7.5pt; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; color: gray;"
lang="EN-US">CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including
attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination,
copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended
recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium,
please so advise the sender immediately.</span><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
| | | |
| derek.rose
Posts:0
| | 11/15/2010 6:26 PM |
| Thanks for the feedback Michael and sorry for the delay in responding.
We have since made a decision to consolidate our datacenters from two to one, and I'm still required to provide HA to a degree without the added benefit of a NLB or HW LB. Before DC consolidation, my namespaces would have simply been mail.domain.tld and failover.domain.tld, having both of those in my SAN cert along with autodiscover.domain.tld.
So, if I have both servers in a single site with a functional DAG - I'm thinking I can condense to just using mail.domain.tld for both CAS instances. I would simply have both the internal and external IP that resolves to this point to the primary server. In the event of a failure for that particular instance (not the site or any other issue), I could just update the internal/external DNS entry of mail.domain.tld to point to the secondary server.
In either scenario there would be manual intervention but trying to find the easiest approach from a client perspective. Are there any obvious flaws in my logic here?
TIA
-Derek
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Michael B. Smith
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 9:49 AM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
A CAS array, by itself, is insufficient within a site - you also need NLB or a HW LB.
A separate site will need a separate namespace. Autodiscover will direct based on the location of the user's mailbox (but that obviously doesn't apply to things like OWA/etc. that aren't autodiscover directed). True site failover, including namespace failover, requires manual intervention (i.e., DNS changes).
There may be upper-end network equipment that can handle the site changes automagically, but I'm not aware of them.
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Derek Rose
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 8:47 AM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Hi List,
I'm still digging through the Exchange 2010 documentation, but wanted to see if there was any input on a HA solution for CAS across multiple sites. If I'm understanding correctly, you can use a CAS Array which would provide a HA solution as long as those CAS servers are in the same site. I'm going to setup a DAG that will have MBXA/CASA/HUBA in Site A and have MBXB/CASB/HUBB in Site B. This should suit pretty much all my needs and I can failover the DAG with little to no issue or user interruption.
I need to look into Auto discover a little more to see how I can handle this - but has anyone dug into this deeper to see what the options are? I think Outlook itself should function OK (I think), but would be more concerned about users who need to access OWA and for Mobile Devices. I think if the CAS Array functionality would be expanded to support multiple AD sites then I'd be golden!
Derek
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
| | | |
| michael1
Posts:426
| | 11/16/2010 1:25 AM |
| I can't think of anything obviously wrong with that, other than you have a server sitting there doing nothing. As long as both servers are part of a RPC CAA and you have a sufficiently low TTL (say, 5 minutes), that should work OK with little client impact - presuming your clients are in cached mode.
________________________________
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] on behalf of Derek Rose [Derek.Rose@sten-tel.com]
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 1:17 PM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Thanks for the feedback Michael and sorry for the delay in responding.
We have since made a decision to consolidate our datacenters from two to one, and I’m still required to provide HA to a degree without the added benefit of a NLB or HW LB. Before DC consolidation, my namespaces would have simply been mail.domain.tld and failover.domain.tld, having both of those in my SAN cert along with autodiscover.domain.tld.
So, if I have both servers in a single site with a functional DAG – I’m thinking I can condense to just using mail.domain.tld for both CAS instances. I would simply have both the internal and external IP that resolves to this point to the primary server. In the event of a failure for that particular instance (not the site or any other issue), I could just update the internal/external DNS entry of mail.domain.tld to point to the secondary server.
In either scenario there would be manual intervention but trying to find the easiest approach from a client perspective. Are there any obvious flaws in my logic here?
TIA
-Derek
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Michael B. Smith
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 9:49 AM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
A CAS array, by itself, is insufficient within a site – you also need NLB or a HW LB.
A separate site will need a separate namespace. Autodiscover will direct based on the location of the user’s mailbox (but that obviously doesn’t apply to things like OWA/etc. that aren’t autodiscover directed). True site failover, including namespace failover, requires manual intervention (i.e., DNS changes).
There may be upper-end network equipment that can handle the site changes automagically, but I’m not aware of them.
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Derek Rose
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 8:47 AM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Hi List,
I’m still digging through the Exchange 2010 documentation, but wanted to see if there was any input on a HA solution for CAS across multiple sites. If I’m understanding correctly, you can use a CAS Array which would provide a HA solution as long as those CAS servers are in the same site. I’m going to setup a DAG that will have MBXA/CASA/HUBA in Site A and have MBXB/CASB/HUBB in Site B. This should suit pretty much all my needs and I can failover the DAG with little to no issue or user interruption.
I need to look into Auto discover a little more to see how I can handle this – but has anyone dug into this deeper to see what the options are? I think Outlook itself should function OK (I think), but would be more concerned about users who need to access OWA and for Mobile Devices. I think if the CAS Array functionality would be expanded to support multiple AD sites then I’d be golden!
Derek
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
| | | |
| derek.rose
Posts:0
| | 11/16/2010 1:45 PM |
| Yes indeed they would be in cached mode and that was the TTL value I was planning on as well. I agree on the downside of the server sitting there doing nothing (besides keeping a local copy of the MBDB through DAG), but don't really see what other options I have without a NLB/HWLB solution to utilize my CAS Array. I'm hoping to procure one sometime in Q1/Q2 next year, at which time I'll make this more robust.
Thanks again for the feedback.
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Michael B. Smith
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 8:24 PM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
I can't think of anything obviously wrong with that, other than you have a server sitting there doing nothing. As long as both servers are part of a RPC CAA and you have a sufficiently low TTL (say, 5 minutes), that should work OK with little client impact - presuming your clients are in cached mode.
________________________________
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] on behalf of Derek Rose [Derek.Rose@sten-tel.com]
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 1:17 PM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Thanks for the feedback Michael and sorry for the delay in responding.
We have since made a decision to consolidate our datacenters from two to one, and I'm still required to provide HA to a degree without the added benefit of a NLB or HW LB. Before DC consolidation, my namespaces would have simply been mail.domain.tld and failover.domain.tld, having both of those in my SAN cert along with autodiscover.domain.tld.
So, if I have both servers in a single site with a functional DAG - I'm thinking I can condense to just using mail.domain.tld for both CAS instances. I would simply have both the internal and external IP that resolves to this point to the primary server. In the event of a failure for that particular instance (not the site or any other issue), I could just update the internal/external DNS entry of mail.domain.tld to point to the secondary server.
In either scenario there would be manual intervention but trying to find the easiest approach from a client perspective. Are there any obvious flaws in my logic here?
TIA
-Derek
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Michael B. Smith
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 9:49 AM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
A CAS array, by itself, is insufficient within a site - you also need NLB or a HW LB.
A separate site will need a separate namespace. Autodiscover will direct based on the location of the user's mailbox (but that obviously doesn't apply to things like OWA/etc. that aren't autodiscover directed). True site failover, including namespace failover, requires manual intervention (i.e., DNS changes).
There may be upper-end network equipment that can handle the site changes automagically, but I'm not aware of them.
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
From: activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:activedir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Derek Rose
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 8:47 AM
To: activedir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT - Question about Exchange 2010 CAS HA
Hi List,
I'm still digging through the Exchange 2010 documentation, but wanted to see if there was any input on a HA solution for CAS across multiple sites. If I'm understanding correctly, you can use a CAS Array which would provide a HA solution as long as those CAS servers are in the same site. I'm going to setup a DAG that will have MBXA/CASA/HUBA in Site A and have MBXB/CASB/HUBB in Site B. This should suit pretty much all my needs and I can failover the DAG with little to no issue or user interruption.
I need to look into Auto discover a little more to see how I can handle this - but has anyone dug into this deeper to see what the options are? I think Outlook itself should function OK (I think), but would be more concerned about users who need to access OWA and for Mobile Devices. I think if the CAS Array functionality would be expanded to support multiple AD sites then I'd be golden!
Derek
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, copying, forwarding or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communication through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
| | | |
|
|