All of my customers know that a SAN cert is required. ;-) In fact, lots of applications now use certificates. There's Exchange and OCS, and I'm aware that in some situations SCCM and SCOM make use of them. As a result, a lot of customers (if they haven't already) choose to implement a Windows CA so that the CAS SAN certificates can be deployed from the internal Windows CA. That cuts down on the number of certificates required from public CAs. If you're deploying OCS, particularly with multiple SIP domains, an internal Windows CA makes absolute sense.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Albert Duro Sent: 12 May 2008 22:25 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Is Exchange 2007 worth it over 2003? OK, so you and Tim are better shoppers than I and were better prepared for this one. Now, can we have a show of hands: how many admins out there who are studying for or doing a migration to 07 had any idea that a SAN cert will very likely be required? --- "Wells, James Arthur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > BEFORE Exchange 2007 RTM, they were expensive. > If you insisted on Verisign certs, they were VERY > expensive. > > Even Verisign bought a smaller company to sell SAN > certs in the last year, though. > > > --James > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Tim Vander Kooi > Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 2:42 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Is Exchange 2007 worth it over 2003? > > I have SAN certs and they are not very expensive. If > you paid a lot for yours then you paid too much. I > have the exact situation you describe and paid less > than $200 to cover all of my various names. Much > cheaper than the old way in my opinion. > Tim > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Albert Duro > Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 2:15 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Is Exchange 2007 worth it over 2003? > > we're going off on a tangent here, but say your > Exchange 2007 Server has a public Cname and a > different internal hostname (not an uncommon > situation), then your "very cheap" certificate will > not work, even though it worked before on Server > 2003 > with the same name split. You'll need a 'Subject > Alternative Name' certificate, and they ain't cheap. > > --- Tim Vander Kooi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm sorry, but as was discussed on one of the > lists > > a week or so ago... Exchange certs are NOT > > expensive. They are really very cheap. > > TVK > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Behalf Of Albert Duro > > Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 12:11 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Is Exchange 2007 worth it over 2003? > > > > yes you can. BUT that doesn't really give you a > > feel > > for 07 so long as it's an inert sidekick. It's > when > > it takes over that all heck breaks loose. That's > > why > > I recommended it for a separate network. > > Just one of many, many examples of what can go > > radically different is that your certificate(s) > may > > no > > longer work with 07, and you may have to acquire > > new, > > expensive ones. > > > > --- "Wohlgemuth, Mike" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Can't you install 07 alongside 03 and keep > user's > > > mailboxes on 03 until > > > you get comfortable with 07 and then just move > the > > > mailboxes over? > > > > > > Just wondering as that is what I was lead to > > believe > > > ... > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > On Behalf Of > > > Albert Duro > > > Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 11:06 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: Re: Is Exchange 2007 worth it over > 2003? > > > > > > I have found the change from Exch 03 to 07 far > > more > > > demanding and > > > stressful > > > that the change from NT/5.5 to AD/Exch 2K. And > > I've > > > often complained of > > > how > > > unnecessarily difficult Exch 07 is, and how it > > seems > > > to me like an > > > incomplete product, with too many rough and > > > crumbling edges. > > > I can see that it offers advantages to a large > > shop > > > with a complex > > > topology > > > and teams of admins who can delve into its > > > complexities. But for a > > > small > > > shop with a tiny team or a team of one, 07 is, > > > frankly, a Katrina. > > > But you can't afford to ignore it, either. My > > > hesitant advice is to > > > stay > > > with 03 for production and get acquainted with > 07 > > in > > > a lab or separate > > > network. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Paul Hutchings" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "Exchange Discussions" > > > <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 7:36 AM > > > Subject: Is Exchange 2007 worth it over 2003? > > > > > > > > > We currently have a single Exchange 2003 SP2 > > server > > > servicing all our > > > mailboxes and public folders. > > > > > > In six months or so I need to look at replacing > > the > > > hardware, which > > > means I need to be thinking now what I want to > do > > on > > > the software side > > > for testing/budgeting purposes etc. > > > > > > I'm looking at the feature list of Exchange 2007 > > vs. > > > 2003 and I'm kind > > > of scratching my head and thinking "What's the > big > > > deal"? > > > > > > We've just gone down the route of a SAN and a > > small > > > ESX cluster, and > > > what I'm currently thinking is skip the software > > > upgrade next year and > > > stick with 2003, and get it virtualized properly > > to > > > add some resiliency, > > > then review it the following year. > > > > > > I'd welcome all feedback but I'm looking at all > > the > > > E27K comparison > > > matrices and tbh there's not much that's > > convincing > > > me that the $70k or > > > so just in CAL costs is going to benefit us > > > sufficiently to justify it. > > > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > Paul > > > > > > -- > > > MIRA Ltd > > > > > > Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 > 0TU, > > > England. > > > > > > Registered in England and Wales No. 402570 > > > VAT Registration GB 114 5409 96 > > > > > > The contents of this e-mail are confidential and > > are > > > solely for the use > > > of > > > the intended recipient. > > > If you receive this e-mail in error, please > delete > === message truncated === _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/read/?forum=exchange To subscribe: http://e-newsletters.internet.com/discussionlists.html/ To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] m Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/read/?forum=exchange To subscribe: http://e-newsletters.internet.com/discussionlists.html/ To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
