Thanks Michael.   Mine would be to move off to a clean AD environment
and for a bit of administrative separation.

 

- John Barsodi

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 11:43 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Implement new AD Forest(Resource forest) for Exchange 2007
for a Exchange 2k/2k3 transition

 

I know a couple of companies that have done this, several large ones. I
wasn't involved in it though.

 

The couple that I've seen do it are because of SLD issues. See:

 

http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2008/04/04/exchang
e-2007-and-domain-rename.aspx

 

and

 

http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2008/04/03/wrappin
g-up-slds-and-exchange-server-2007.aspx

 

That being said, many of the earlier reasons for doing so (that still
apply) are based on separation of security and responsibility. Exchange
and Active Directory are inextricably linked. It's difficult (not
impossible, just difficult) to have people responsible for one who are
not responsible for the other.

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith

MCITP:EM/MCSE/Exchange MVP

http://TheEssentialExchange.com

 

From: Barsodi.John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 2:02 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Implement new AD Forest(Resource forest) for Exchange 2007 for
a Exchange 2k/2k3 transition

 

Has anyone performed an Exchange 2007 transition to a Resource from
their current AD forest with Exchange 2000/2003?

 

Just curious if anyone has done this yet and what challenges did you
encounter?  What factors came into play when deciding to implement this
way?

 

Thanks,

 

- John Barsodi

 

 

 

 


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~

Reply via email to