dumb question regarding powershell and 2010.

[Bill Humphries]

i'm wanting to get a list of mailboxes sorted by size.  I run this:

[PS] C:\Windows\system32>Get-MailboxStatistics | Sort -Property 
TotalItemsize | Format-Table DisplayName, LastLoggedOnUs
erAccount, ItemCount, 
@{expression={$_.totalitemsize.value.ToMB()};label="Size(MB)"}, 
LastLogonTime, LastLogoffTime


but when i run it, it asks me to provide an identity.  i just want a 
list.  what is my problem?


thanks.

bill

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

RE: Lots of cmd.exe processes on Mailbox Server

[Tu, Kevin]

Thanks for replying. I used another tool and got the detailed information. It 
seems related to the backup batch file which creates two cmd.exe processes 
every day.

Thanks again, Kevin
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 1:49 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Lots of cmd.exe processes on Mailbox Server


If it helps, this will tell you who the owners of the processes are:



$owners = @{}
gwmi win32_process |% {$owners[$_.handle] = $_.getowner().user}

get-process | select processname,Id,@{l="Owner";e={$owners[$_.id.tostring()]}}


From: Tu, Kevin [...@ccscorporation.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 2:42 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Lots of cmd.exe processes on Mailbox Server
Hi,

There are lots of cmd.exe processes running on our clustered Mailbox server. Is 
this an issue or not? We haven't seen any issue in Event log, and no SCOM 
alerts related to this as well.

The mailbox server is running on Exchange 2007 SP2 Rollup 1, Windows Server 
2008 SP2 with SCOM agent installed.

[cid:image001.png@01CBAC18.64FF8110]

Thanks, Kevin

This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of 
the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and 
privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return 
email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it 
and destroy any copies
immediately.
CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views 
expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may 
be transmitted with this email.
This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, 
adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner.

CCS-06-01-2009

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

**

Note:

The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and

protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the intended

recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to

the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,

distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you

have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by

replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

**

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist<>

RE: Lots of cmd.exe processes on Mailbox Server

[Castillo, Daniel (Directory Services)]

tasklist /v | findstr /i "cmd.exe"

Any scheduled tasks hung?





~D



From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 2:49 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Lots of cmd.exe processes on Mailbox Server



If it helps, this will tell you who the owners of the processes are:



$owners = @{}
gwmi win32_process |% {$owners[$_.handle] = $_.getowner().user}

get-process | select processname,Id,@{l="Owner";e={$owners[$_.id.tostring()]}}

  _

From: Tu, Kevin [...@ccscorporation.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 2:42 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Lots of cmd.exe processes on Mailbox Server

Hi,



There are lots of cmd.exe processes running on our clustered Mailbox server. Is 
this an issue or not? We haven't seen any issue in Event log, and no SCOM 
alerts related to this as well.



The mailbox server is running on Exchange 2007 SP2 Rollup 1, Windows Server 
2008 SP2 with SCOM agent installed.







Thanks, Kevin


This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of 
the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and 
privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return 
email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it 
and destroy any copies
immediately.
CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views 
expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may 
be transmitted with this email.
This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, 
adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner.

CCS-06-01-2009

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

**
Note:
The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and
protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
**

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist


---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist<>

RE: Lots of cmd.exe processes on Mailbox Server

[Campbell, Rob]

If it helps, this will tell you who the owners of the processes are:



$owners = @{}
gwmi win32_process |% {$owners[$_.handle] = $_.getowner().user}

get-process | select processname,Id,@{l="Owner";e={$owners[$_.id.tostring()]}}


From: Tu, Kevin [...@ccscorporation.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 2:42 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Lots of cmd.exe processes on Mailbox Server

Hi,

There are lots of cmd.exe processes running on our clustered Mailbox server. Is 
this an issue or not? We haven’t seen any issue in Event log, and no SCOM 
alerts related to this as well.

The mailbox server is running on Exchange 2007 SP2 Rollup 1, Windows Server 
2008 SP2 with SCOM agent installed.

[cid:image001.png@01CBAC14.95D74E70]

Thanks, Kevin

This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of 
the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and 
privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return 
email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it 
and destroy any copies
immediately.
CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views 
expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may 
be transmitted with this email.
This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, 
adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner.

CCS-06-01-2009

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
**
Note: 
The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential 
and 
protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the intended  
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to  
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,   
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you  
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by  
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. 
**

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist<>

Lots of cmd.exe processes on Mailbox Server

[Tu, Kevin]

Hi,

There are lots of cmd.exe processes running on our clustered Mailbox server. Is 
this an issue or not? We haven't seen any issue in Event log, and no SCOM 
alerts related to this as well.

The mailbox server is running on Exchange 2007 SP2 Rollup 1, Windows Server 
2008 SP2 with SCOM agent installed.

[cid:image001.png@01CBAC14.95D74E70]

Thanks, Kevin

This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of 
the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and 
privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return 
email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it 
and destroy any copies
immediately.
CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views 
expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may 
be transmitted with this email.
This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, 
adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner.

CCS-06-01-2009

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist<>

RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Webster]

The 2nd book is the best.  It almost exactly goes chapter by chapter with
the MoC for the Exchange 2010 Design Course.

 

BTW,  if you buy the print book, you can go to oreilly.com, register it, pay
$4.99 and get the book in 5 different "e" formats.  Copy the appropriate
file to your mobile device of choice and carry the book around in digital
form.

 

 

Webster

 

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] 
Subject: RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

 

Make sure that two of the books you have are:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Exchange-Server-2010-Practices/dp/0735627193
/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8

&s=books&qid=1294157871&sr=8-1

 

http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Microsoft-Exchange-Server-2010/dp/0470521716
/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8

&s=books&qid=1294157871&sr=8-6

 



 

I wrote some chapters in the second book.

 




---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Maglinger, Paul]

I can vouch for the first book.  The consultant that came in to help our 
migration carried around and kept thumbing through the second.

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:20 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

Make sure that two of the books you have are:

http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Exchange-Server-2010-Practices/dp/0735627193/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1294157871&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Microsoft-Exchange-Server-2010/dp/0470521716/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1294157871&sr=8-6



I wrote some chapters in the second book.



Regards,

Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com

From: helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:52 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.


This is not an option.

The firm pays for books + exam cost that's all !!!

I don't want this post to turn into a moaning session about the place I work 
at; some like it that way in the team. There is no pressure in giving exams and 
things have not moved a great deal for us.

Now we have bought a few books as we need it and we are getting up to speed.

The skills sets in our team we are fairly confident we can deliver this 
project. In some cases we have over spec'd the solution as opposed to under 
spec it to be on the safe side. :(

Thanks

Jim






On 4 January 2011 14:14, Maglinger, Paul 
mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com>> wrote:
I would propose that if they are unwilling to bring in outside help, then it 
becomes more important that your group receive some kind of training 
beforehand.  Depending on  your Microsoft agreement, there may be funds 
available to offset some of the cost of migration as well as training dollars!

-Paul

From: helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:02 AM

To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

I completely agree with your comments and I would not do that either but the 
fact is as follows...simply to convince management that we need to get it right 
& has been a massive challenge itself but they have agreed on one condition 
that internal IT would have to design and implement this solution. Getting 
external companies involved is not possible due to the cost. I guess the IT 
Director is trying to justify our jobs & savings as we are going through 
redundancy due to a merger in all depts. :(

So as a team of 5 we have to perform 100% !!!
So coming back to your comments are fantastic some information I could not find 
anywhere :)

So when you  "four HT/CAS combinations" say do you mean a combined role 
installation ? The number of users could double within two years would that 
still be recommended approach OR should we stick to a distributed approach ?

1. RTO : This will be D2D2T (T = Tape Library) solution using veritas. We are 
also considering a  de-duplicator but that is being discussed.

2.  User mix this was amazing question it completely slipped out of my mind ?
Three types of Users we will provide service for are as follows:

Based on 10K Users


a. OWA Users= 8 k ( They 
will use only OWA internally and while at home )
b. Outlook Users   = Per site we 
will have approx 300 users using Outlook ( Current Total = 2000 Users )
c. Mobile Phone users ( IPhone / HTC )   = These users will be the same 
users in point 2 but I would probably say not even 500 users will be given 
company phones for this purpose.

Those 2000 users mentioned above in (b) will also have DAG enabled Database and 
will spread them accross 3 servers. All servers will be in the single AD site, 
same physical Data Center and subnet.

I hope by this discussion I will get a firm understanding of how many servers 
we will need & what roles will reside on which servers.

3. But are there any guidelines that the name for OWA / ecp etcshould not 
be the same as the RPC ARrray ?

4. My impression was exchange 2010 generates a self signed ssl at the time of 
the install or is this a manual task for SSL / TLS ?

8. I am beginning to read up on this one :)  "Set-OutlookProvider"  :) I 
hope this is the answer to all our problems for Outlook configuration.


Thank you so much and looking forward for some ideas. :)

cheers

Jim



On 3 January 2011 17:16, Michael B. Smith 
mailto:mich...@smithcons.com>> wrote:
Soa detailed design of this magnitude is not something I would attempt to 
do via email. That being said, you've obviously done lots of investigation 
already, which is a good thing. I'd recommend you sit down with someone who has 
done a migration this large and spend a couple of days coming up with a 
detailed plan.

I

Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[helpdesk UK]

So basically a beast of a spec on each CAS/HT both roles in one server. But
in spite of it being virtual does it not make it easy if we keep the roles
separate ?

Not being silly just thinking what are the down sides. I am not sure how the
licensing works yet as someone else in my team is looking into that but I am
under the impression that the license works on per user Enterprise CAL ? and
like £ 300 for each instance of a server install. am I correct ? + Windows
OS Enterprise License.

#2 They call it pence :) :)

So let's take for example if we have the mix wrong and the real figure would
be a 50 - 50 mix. How many CAS servers should we have ?

#3 I was not aware of this clearly I have not read all the books yet :( so
the RPC Array name has to be internal FQDN.

#4 That question was refereed more towards SSL offloading. i.e. if we are
offloading SSL on HLB than we can get rid of the self signed certificate.
for OWA / ECP / etc run the web services on http

Keep it coming. :)


Thank you

cheers

Jim






On 4 January 2011 16:32, Michael B. Smith  wrote:

>  “four HT/CAS combinations” – yes, multi-role. In a many-processor server,
> they don’t tend to get in each other’s way.
>
>
>
> In re: RTO – you still didn’t tell me what your RTO is. J How quickly your
> backup/restore application can restore a database + 50% (I call this the
> “frazzle factor”) defines how large you can let your databases get.
>
>
>
> [2] So 80% of your users will be OWA? If so, I would still stick with four
> CAS/HT, but you’ve got at least 2n+1 redundancy.  In U.S. currency I would
> normally say “I bet you a quarter that you’ve underestimated your Outlook
> usage”. What is that in British lbs? A crown? J
>
>
>
> [3] The RPC client access array is only used internally and thus will be
> named according to your internal naming conventions. In this case “will be”
> == “must be”. You can’t map it to your external namespace and expect it to
> work. If you try, it won’t work. The UC/SAN certificate will use the
> external namespace only.
>
>
>
> [4] It will generate a 5-year self-signed certificate (unless you
> specifically tell it not to). But you asked “Will the CAS servers need any
> certificates at all” and the answer is yes – the self-signed one. J
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Michael B. Smith
>
> Consultant and Exchange MVP
>
> http://TheEssentialExchange.com 
>
>
>
> *From:* helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
>  *Sent:* Tuesday, January 04, 2011 8:02 AM
> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
>
>
>
> I completely agree with your comments and I would not do that either but
> the fact is as follows...simply to convince management that we need to get
> it right & has been a massive challenge itself but they have agreed on one
> condition that internal IT would have to design and implement this solution.
> Getting external companies involved is not possible due to the cost. I guess
> the IT Director is trying to justify our jobs & savings as we are going
> through redundancy due to a merger in all depts. :(
>
>
>
> So as a team of 5 we have to perform 100% !!!
>
> So coming back to your comments are fantastic some information I could not
> find anywhere :)
>
>
>
> So when you  "four HT/CAS combinations" say do you mean a combined role
> installation ? The number of users could double within two years would that
> still be recommended approach OR should we stick to a distributed approach ?
>
>
>
> 1. RTO : This will be D2D2T (T = Tape Library) solution using veritas. We
> are also considering a  de-duplicator but that is being discussed.
>
>
>
> 2.  User mix this was amazing question it completely slipped out of my mind
> ?
>
> Three types of Users we will provide service for are as follows:
>
>
>
> Based on 10K Users
>
> 
>
>
>
> a. OWA Users= 8 k (
> They will use only OWA internally and while at home )
>
> b. Outlook Users   = Per site
> we will have approx 300 users using Outlook ( Current Total = 2000 Users )
>
> c. Mobile Phone users ( IPhone / HTC )   = These users will be the same
> users in point 2 but I would probably say not even 500 users will be given
> company phones for this purpose.
>
>
>
> Those 2000 users mentioned above in (b) will also have DAG enabled Database
> and will spread them accross 3 servers. All servers will be in the single AD
> site, same physical Data Center and subnet.
>
>
>
> I hope by this discussion I will get a firm understanding of how many
> servers we will need & what roles will reside on which servers.
>
>
>
> 3. But are there any guidelines that the name for OWA / ecp etcshould
> not be the same as the RPC ARrray ?
>
>
>
> 4. My impression was exchange 2010 generates a self signed ssl at the time
> of the install or is this a manual task for SSL / TLS ?
>
>
>

RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Maglinger, Paul]

Very nice.

-Original Message-
From: Gary Babb [mailto:gsb...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:17 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

Microsoft has written white papers on deploying Exchange 2010 for 500, 9,000 
and 16,000 mailboxes. They are a great read, see white paper description below 
from Microsoft:

This white paper provides an example of how to design, test, and validate an 
Exchange 2010 solution for customer environments with 9,000 mailboxes deployed 
on Dell server and storage solutions. The step-by-step methodology in this 
document walks through the important design decision points that help address 
key challenges while ensuring that core business requirements are met.

Here are the links to each white paper:

1. 500 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e0e93251-fc04-4a18-8aa0-23817b6d0c97
 
2. 9,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=c89c9e7b-9b70-4370-8db9-593cbe518791
3. 16,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=987882fb-5286-48a6-800f-64665a278613

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Michael B. Smith]

Kemp will work just fine, as long as you get a unit large enough to meet your 
needs. You'll need AT LEAST a 2x LM-2500 and it seems more likely that you'll 
need a 2x LM-3500.

Still much less than an equivalent F5 solution.

Do you understand the concept of SNAT and IP affinity?

If so, you can see that "by default" if you have a group of users all 
connecting from a single SNAT address and you are using IP affinity for 
load-balancing (which you must for Outlook Anywhere and it's very inefficient 
if you DON'T for OWA and EAS), then all of those users coming from the SNAT 
address would be targeted to the same server behind the load balancer.

Your LB solution needs a way to break those up, but to do so predictably so 
that source computer <-> destination computer mapping is maintained properly 
withOUT asynchronous routing. Enter the world of HTTP Keepalives and port 
masking... Kemp, F5, and Cisco provide ways to do this. Last time I checked - 
no one else did (although that may have changed - don't quote me).

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com

From: helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 1:55 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.


For HLB it seems to be leaning more towards Kemp Technologies from today's 
meeting. The discussion was around the cost factor purely. :(  2 * 5500

http://www.kemptechnologies.com/uk/server-load-balancing-appliances/product-matrix.html

If for some reason as you mention the "impact" it will have on the design can 
you please touch on a little so I can debate this once again with the team and 
IT Director as some are very keen on F5.

You are correct regarding the CAS/HT but overall the design is a bit woolly I 
completely agree. The reason being we have to have the requirements in place by 
end of Jan start sourcing the kit so it is all paid off before April so I 
have been told. :(

Yes this will be a Fibre SAN solution with VMware due to saving rack space & 
power in the data center (this will be hosted externally)

I read up on the DAS recommendations as well and JBOD solutions on HP website. 
Many MS recommendations as well on JBOD and go backup less !!! The concept is 
very nice. :)


Thank you

Jim






On 4 January 2011 16:12, Michael B. Smith 
mailto:mich...@smithcons.com>> wrote:
I had not seen those - thanks for posting them.

I'm not thrilled with #3 - they gloss over the CAS/HT planning and don't really 
discuss the impact that your choice of HW LB has on CAS planning (all of F5, 
Cisco, and Kemp Technologies have solutions that deal with SNAT sources so that 
IP affinity can be dealt with properly). It also assumes SAN. I know that's a 
requirement in some environments, but in general - even for the BIG deployments 
- I've been deploying 2010 on DAS.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com

-Original Message-
From: Gary Babb [mailto:gsb...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:17 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
Microsoft has written white papers on deploying Exchange 2010 for 500, 9,000 
and 16,000 mailboxes. They are a great read, see white paper description below 
from Microsoft:

This white paper provides an example of how to design, test, and validate an 
Exchange 2010 solution for customer environments with 9,000 mailboxes deployed 
on Dell server and storage solutions. The step-by-step methodology in this 
document walks through the important design decision points that help address 
key challenges while ensuring that core business requirements are met.

Here are the links to each white paper:

1. 500 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e0e93251-fc04-4a18-8aa0-23817b6d0c97
2. 9,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=c89c9e7b-9b70-4370-8db9-593cbe518791
3. 16,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=987882fb-5286-48a6-800f-64665a278613

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist


---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-so

RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Campbell, Rob]

Don't know if it's going to be pertinent to your deployment or not, but this 
just came out yesterday:

http://blogs.msexchange.org/walther/2011/01/03/load-balancing-exchange-2010-hub-transport-servers-content-now-in-the-technet-documentation/

From: helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 12:55 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.


For HLB it seems to be leaning more towards Kemp Technologies from today's 
meeting. The discussion was around the cost factor purely. :(  2 * 5500

http://www.kemptechnologies.com/uk/server-load-balancing-appliances/product-matrix.html

If for some reason as you mention the "impact" it will have on the design can 
you please touch on a little so I can debate this once again with the team and 
IT Director as some are very keen on F5.

You are correct regarding the CAS/HT but overall the design is a bit woolly I 
completely agree. The reason being we have to have the requirements in place by 
end of Jan start sourcing the kit so it is all paid off before April so I 
have been told. :(

Yes this will be a Fibre SAN solution with VMware due to saving rack space & 
power in the data center (this will be hosted externally)

I read up on the DAS recommendations as well and JBOD solutions on HP website. 
Many MS recommendations as well on JBOD and go backup less !!! The concept is 
very nice. :)


Thank you

Jim






On 4 January 2011 16:12, Michael B. Smith 
mailto:mich...@smithcons.com>> wrote:
I had not seen those - thanks for posting them.

I'm not thrilled with #3 - they gloss over the CAS/HT planning and don't really 
discuss the impact that your choice of HW LB has on CAS planning (all of F5, 
Cisco, and Kemp Technologies have solutions that deal with SNAT sources so that 
IP affinity can be dealt with properly). It also assumes SAN. I know that's a 
requirement in some environments, but in general - even for the BIG deployments 
- I've been deploying 2010 on DAS.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com

-Original Message-
From: Gary Babb [mailto:gsb...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:17 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
Microsoft has written white papers on deploying Exchange 2010 for 500, 9,000 
and 16,000 mailboxes. They are a great read, see white paper description below 
from Microsoft:

This white paper provides an example of how to design, test, and validate an 
Exchange 2010 solution for customer environments with 9,000 mailboxes deployed 
on Dell server and storage solutions. The step-by-step methodology in this 
document walks through the important design decision points that help address 
key challenges while ensuring that core business requirements are met.

Here are the links to each white paper:

1. 500 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e0e93251-fc04-4a18-8aa0-23817b6d0c97
2. 9,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=c89c9e7b-9b70-4370-8db9-593cbe518791
3. 16,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=987882fb-5286-48a6-800f-64665a278613

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist


---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
**
Note: 
The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential 
and 
protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the intended  
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to  
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,   
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you  
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by  
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. 
**

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[helpdesk UK]

Michael Thank you once again.

We dont have these books yet and they have just been forwarded to the
purchasing team :)

Thank you

Jim

On 4 January 2011 16:20, Michael B. Smith  wrote:

>  Make sure that two of the books you have are:
>
>
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Exchange-Server-2010-Practices/dp/0735627193/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1294157871&sr=8-1
>
>
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Microsoft-Exchange-Server-2010/dp/0470521716/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1294157871&sr=8-6
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> I wrote some chapters in the second book.
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Michael B. Smith
>
> Consultant and Exchange MVP
>
> http://TheEssentialExchange.com 
>
>
>
> *From:* helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:52 AM
>
> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
>
>
>
>
>
> This is not an option.
>
>
>
> The firm pays for books + exam cost that's all !!!
>
>
>
> I don't want this post to turn into a moaning session about the place I
> work at; some like it that way in the team. There is no pressure in giving
> exams and things have not moved a great deal for us.
>
>
>
> Now we have bought a few books as we need it and we are getting up to
> speed.
>
>
>
> The skills sets in our team we are fairly confident we can deliver this
> project. In some cases we have over spec'd the solution as opposed to under
> spec it to be on the safe side. :(
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4 January 2011 14:14, Maglinger, Paul  wrote:
>
> I would propose that if they are unwilling to bring in outside help, then
> it becomes more important that your group receive some kind of training
> beforehand.  Depending on  your Microsoft agreement, there may be funds
> available to offset some of the cost of migration as well as training
> dollars!
>
>
>
> -Paul
>
>
>
> *From:* helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:02 AM
>
>
> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
>
> *Subject:* Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
>
>
>
> I completely agree with your comments and I would not do that either but
> the fact is as follows...simply to convince management that we need to get
> it right & has been a massive challenge itself but they have agreed on one
> condition that internal IT would have to design and implement this solution.
> Getting external companies involved is not possible due to the cost. I guess
> the IT Director is trying to justify our jobs & savings as we are going
> through redundancy due to a merger in all depts. :(
>
>
>
> So as a team of 5 we have to perform 100% !!!
>
> So coming back to your comments are fantastic some information I could not
> find anywhere :)
>
>
>
> So when you  "four HT/CAS combinations" say do you mean a combined role
> installation ? The number of users could double within two years would that
> still be recommended approach OR should we stick to a distributed approach ?
>
>
>
> 1. RTO : This will be D2D2T (T = Tape Library) solution using veritas. We
> are also considering a  de-duplicator but that is being discussed.
>
>
>
> 2.  User mix this was amazing question it completely slipped out of my mind
> ?
>
> Three types of Users we will provide service for are as follows:
>
>
>
> Based on 10K Users
>
> 
>
>
>
> a. OWA Users= 8 k (
> They will use only OWA internally and while at home )
>
> b. Outlook Users   = Per site
> we will have approx 300 users using Outlook ( Current Total = 2000 Users )
>
> c. Mobile Phone users ( IPhone / HTC )   = These users will be the same
> users in point 2 but I would probably say not even 500 users will be given
> company phones for this purpose.
>
>
>
> Those 2000 users mentioned above in (b) will also have DAG enabled Database
> and will spread them accross 3 servers. All servers will be in the single AD
> site, same physical Data Center and subnet.
>
>
>
> I hope by this discussion I will get a firm understanding of how many
> servers we will need & what roles will reside on which servers.
>
>
>
> 3. But are there any guidelines that the name for OWA / ecp etcshould
> not be the same as the RPC ARrray ?
>
>
>
> 4. My impression was exchange 2010 generates a self signed ssl at the time
> of the install or is this a manual task for SSL / TLS ?
>
>
>
> 8. I am beginning to read up on this one :)  "Set-OutlookProvider"  :)
> I hope this is the answer to all our problems for Outlook configuration.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you so much and looking forward for some ideas. :)
>
>
>
> cheers
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3 January 2011 17:16, Michael B. Smith  wrote:
>
> So….a detailed design of this magnitude is not something I would attempt to
> do via email. That being said, you’ve obviously done lots of investigation
> 

Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[helpdesk UK]

For HLB it seems to be leaning more towards Kemp Technologies from today's
meeting. The discussion was around the cost factor purely. :(  2 * 5500

http://www.kemptechnologies.com/uk/server-load-balancing-appliances/product-matrix.html

If for some reason as you mention the "*impact*" it will have on the design
can you please touch on a little so I can debate this once again with the
team and IT Director as some are very keen on F5.

You are correct regarding the CAS/HT but overall the design is a bit woolly
I completely agree. The reason being we have to have the requirements in
place by end of Jan start sourcing the kit so it is all paid off before
April so I have been told. :(

Yes this will be a Fibre SAN solution with VMware due to saving rack space &
power in the data center (this will be hosted externally)

I read up on the DAS recommendations as well and JBOD solutions on HP
website. Many MS recommendations as well on JBOD and go backup less !!! The
concept is very nice. :)


Thank you

Jim






On 4 January 2011 16:12, Michael B. Smith  wrote:

> I had not seen those - thanks for posting them.
>
> I'm not thrilled with #3 - they gloss over the CAS/HT planning and don’t
> really discuss the impact that your choice of HW LB has on CAS planning (all
> of F5, Cisco, and Kemp Technologies have solutions that deal with SNAT
> sources so that IP affinity can be dealt with properly). It also assumes
> SAN. I know that's a requirement in some environments, but in general - even
> for the BIG deployments - I've been deploying 2010 on DAS.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael B. Smith
> Consultant and Exchange MVP
> http://TheEssentialExchange.com 
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Gary Babb [mailto:gsb...@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:17 AM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
>
>  Microsoft has written white papers on deploying Exchange 2010 for 500,
> 9,000 and 16,000 mailboxes. They are a great read, see white paper
> description below from Microsoft:
>
> This white paper provides an example of how to design, test, and validate
> an Exchange 2010 solution for customer environments with 9,000 mailboxes
> deployed on Dell server and storage solutions. The step-by-step methodology
> in this document walks through the important design decision points that
> help address key challenges while ensuring that core business requirements
> are met.
>
> Here are the links to each white paper:
>
> 1. 500 Mailboxes -
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e0e93251-fc04-4a18-8aa0-23817b6d0c97
> 2. 9,000 Mailboxes -
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=c89c9e7b-9b70-4370-8db9-593cbe518791
> 3. 16,000 Mailboxes -
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=987882fb-5286-48a6-800f-64665a278613
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
> with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
> with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
>

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Oz Casey Dedeal]

Thanks Gary for sharing great links

ocd




On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Gary Babb  wrote:

> Microsoft has written white papers on deploying Exchange 2010 for 500,
> 9,000 and 16,000 mailboxes. They are a great read, see white paper
> description below from Microsoft:
>
> This white paper provides an example of how to design, test, and validate
> an Exchange 2010 solution for customer environments with 9,000 mailboxes
> deployed on Dell server and storage solutions. The step-by-step methodology
> in this document walks through the important design decision points that
> help address key challenges while ensuring that core business requirements
> are met.
>
> Here are the links to each white paper:
>
> 1. 500 Mailboxes -
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e0e93251-fc04-4a18-8aa0-23817b6d0c97
> 2. 9,000 Mailboxes -
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=c89c9e7b-9b70-4370-8db9-593cbe518791
> 3. 16,000 Mailboxes -
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=987882fb-5286-48a6-800f-64665a278613
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
> with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
>



-- 

Oz Casey Dedeal
Systems Engineer

 MCITP (EMA), MCITP (EA), MCITP (SA),
MCSE 2003| M+| S+ | MCDST | Security+
|Project+| Server+|


http://smtp25.blogspot.com (Blog)
http://telnet25.wordpress.com (Blog)
http://telnet25.spaces.live.com  (Blog)

telne...@gmail.com
MCPvirtualbusinesscard

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Michael B. Smith]

I had not seen those - thanks for posting them.

I'm not thrilled with #3 - they gloss over the CAS/HT planning and don’t really 
discuss the impact that your choice of HW LB has on CAS planning (all of F5, 
Cisco, and Kemp Technologies have solutions that deal with SNAT sources so that 
IP affinity can be dealt with properly). It also assumes SAN. I know that's a 
requirement in some environments, but in general - even for the BIG deployments 
- I've been deploying 2010 on DAS.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com


-Original Message-
From: Gary Babb [mailto:gsb...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:17 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

Microsoft has written white papers on deploying Exchange 2010 for 500, 9,000 
and 16,000 mailboxes. They are a great read, see white paper description below 
from Microsoft:

This white paper provides an example of how to design, test, and validate an 
Exchange 2010 solution for customer environments with 9,000 mailboxes deployed 
on Dell server and storage solutions. The step-by-step methodology in this 
document walks through the important design decision points that help address 
key challenges while ensuring that core business requirements are met.

Here are the links to each white paper:

1. 500 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e0e93251-fc04-4a18-8aa0-23817b6d0c97
 
2. 9,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=c89c9e7b-9b70-4370-8db9-593cbe518791
3. 16,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=987882fb-5286-48a6-800f-64665a278613

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[helpdesk UK]

Those links are fantastic !!!

As soon as I have read up the Outlook Provider feature I will jump into this
straight away. :)

Thank you once again

cheers

Jim

On 4 January 2011 15:17, Gary Babb  wrote:

> Microsoft has written white papers on deploying Exchange 2010 for 500,
> 9,000 and 16,000 mailboxes. They are a great read, see white paper
> description below from Microsoft:
>
> This white paper provides an example of how to design, test, and validate
> an Exchange 2010 solution for customer environments with 9,000 mailboxes
> deployed on Dell server and storage solutions. The step-by-step methodology
> in this document walks through the important design decision points that
> help address key challenges while ensuring that core business requirements
> are met.
>
> Here are the links to each white paper:
>
> 1. 500 Mailboxes -
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e0e93251-fc04-4a18-8aa0-23817b6d0c97
> 2. 9,000 Mailboxes -
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=c89c9e7b-9b70-4370-8db9-593cbe518791
> 3. 16,000 Mailboxes -
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=987882fb-5286-48a6-800f-64665a278613
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
> with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
>

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[helpdesk UK]

If it was none of us would be migrating to 2010 ? :)

Jim

On 4 January 2011 15:12, Maglinger, Paul  wrote:

>  I only bring it up because Exchange 2010 ain’t your daddy’s Exchange
> anymore.  Powershell, though it may be more flexible, throws a whole new
> kink of complexity into the mix.
>
>
>
> *From:* helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 04, 2011 8:52 AM
>
> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
>
>
>
>
>
> This is not an option.
>
>
>
> The firm pays for books + exam cost that's all !!!
>
>
>
> I don't want this post to turn into a moaning session about the place I
> work at; some like it that way in the team. There is no pressure in giving
> exams and things have not moved a great deal for us.
>
>
>
> Now we have bought a few books as we need it and we are getting up to
> speed.
>
>
>
> The skills sets in our team we are fairly confident we can deliver this
> project. In some cases we have over spec'd the solution as opposed to under
> spec it to be on the safe side. :(
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4 January 2011 14:14, Maglinger, Paul  wrote:
>
> I would propose that if they are unwilling to bring in outside help, then
> it becomes more important that your group receive some kind of training
> beforehand.  Depending on  your Microsoft agreement, there may be funds
> available to offset some of the cost of migration as well as training
> dollars!
>
>
>
> -Paul
>
>
>
> *From:* helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:02 AM
>
>
> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
>
> *Subject:* Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
>
>
>
> I completely agree with your comments and I would not do that either but
> the fact is as follows...simply to convince management that we need to get
> it right & has been a massive challenge itself but they have agreed on one
> condition that internal IT would have to design and implement this solution.
> Getting external companies involved is not possible due to the cost. I guess
> the IT Director is trying to justify our jobs & savings as we are going
> through redundancy due to a merger in all depts. :(
>
>
>
> So as a team of 5 we have to perform 100% !!!
>
> So coming back to your comments are fantastic some information I could not
> find anywhere :)
>
>
>
> So when you  "four HT/CAS combinations" say do you mean a combined role
> installation ? The number of users could double within two years would that
> still be recommended approach OR should we stick to a distributed approach ?
>
>
>
> 1. RTO : This will be D2D2T (T = Tape Library) solution using veritas. We
> are also considering a  de-duplicator but that is being discussed.
>
>
>
> 2.  User mix this was amazing question it completely slipped out of my mind
> ?
>
> Three types of Users we will provide service for are as follows:
>
>
>
> Based on 10K Users
>
> 
>
>
>
> a. OWA Users= 8 k (
> They will use only OWA internally and while at home )
>
> b. Outlook Users   = Per site
> we will have approx 300 users using Outlook ( Current Total = 2000 Users )
>
> c. Mobile Phone users ( IPhone / HTC )   = These users will be the same
> users in point 2 but I would probably say not even 500 users will be given
> company phones for this purpose.
>
>
>
> Those 2000 users mentioned above in (b) will also have DAG enabled Database
> and will spread them accross 3 servers. All servers will be in the single AD
> site, same physical Data Center and subnet.
>
>
>
> I hope by this discussion I will get a firm understanding of how many
> servers we will need & what roles will reside on which servers.
>
>
>
> 3. But are there any guidelines that the name for OWA / ecp etcshould
> not be the same as the RPC ARrray ?
>
>
>
> 4. My impression was exchange 2010 generates a self signed ssl at the time
> of the install or is this a manual task for SSL / TLS ?
>
>
>
> 8. I am beginning to read up on this one :)  "Set-OutlookProvider"  :)
> I hope this is the answer to all our problems for Outlook configuration.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you so much and looking forward for some ideas. :)
>
>
>
> cheers
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3 January 2011 17:16, Michael B. Smith  wrote:
>
> So….a detailed design of this magnitude is not something I would attempt to
> do via email. That being said, you’ve obviously done lots of investigation
> already, which is a good thing. I’d recommend you sit down with someone who
> has done a migration this large and spend a couple of days coming up with a
> detailed plan.
>
>
>
> I think you don’t need that many servers based on 15K users.  I’d probably
> go with four HT/CAS combinations.
>
>
>
> [1] what’s your RTO? What, if anything is your backup speed/mechanism?
> That’s the questions that defines the answer.
>
>
>
> [2] De

re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Gary Babb]

Microsoft has written white papers on deploying Exchange 2010 for 500, 9,000 
and 16,000 mailboxes. They are a great read, see white paper description below 
from Microsoft:

This white paper provides an example of how to design, test, and validate an 
Exchange 2010 solution for customer environments with 9,000 mailboxes deployed 
on Dell server and storage solutions. The step-by-step methodology in this 
document walks through the important design decision points that help address 
key challenges while ensuring that core business requirements are met.

Here are the links to each white paper:

1. 500 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e0e93251-fc04-4a18-8aa0-23817b6d0c97
 
2. 9,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=c89c9e7b-9b70-4370-8db9-593cbe518791
3. 16,000 Mailboxes - 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=987882fb-5286-48a6-800f-64665a278613

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Maglinger, Paul]

I only bring it up because Exchange 2010 ain't your daddy's Exchange anymore.  
Powershell, though it may be more flexible, throws a whole new kink of 
complexity into the mix.

From: helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 8:52 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.


This is not an option.

The firm pays for books + exam cost that's all !!!

I don't want this post to turn into a moaning session about the place I work 
at; some like it that way in the team. There is no pressure in giving exams and 
things have not moved a great deal for us.

Now we have bought a few books as we need it and we are getting up to speed.

The skills sets in our team we are fairly confident we can deliver this 
project. In some cases we have over spec'd the solution as opposed to under 
spec it to be on the safe side. :(

Thanks

Jim






On 4 January 2011 14:14, Maglinger, Paul 
mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com>> wrote:
I would propose that if they are unwilling to bring in outside help, then it 
becomes more important that your group receive some kind of training 
beforehand.  Depending on  your Microsoft agreement, there may be funds 
available to offset some of the cost of migration as well as training dollars!

-Paul

From: helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:02 AM

To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

I completely agree with your comments and I would not do that either but the 
fact is as follows...simply to convince management that we need to get it right 
& has been a massive challenge itself but they have agreed on one condition 
that internal IT would have to design and implement this solution. Getting 
external companies involved is not possible due to the cost. I guess the IT 
Director is trying to justify our jobs & savings as we are going through 
redundancy due to a merger in all depts. :(

So as a team of 5 we have to perform 100% !!!
So coming back to your comments are fantastic some information I could not find 
anywhere :)

So when you  "four HT/CAS combinations" say do you mean a combined role 
installation ? The number of users could double within two years would that 
still be recommended approach OR should we stick to a distributed approach ?

1. RTO : This will be D2D2T (T = Tape Library) solution using veritas. We are 
also considering a  de-duplicator but that is being discussed.

2.  User mix this was amazing question it completely slipped out of my mind ?
Three types of Users we will provide service for are as follows:

Based on 10K Users


a. OWA Users= 8 k ( They 
will use only OWA internally and while at home )
b. Outlook Users   = Per site we 
will have approx 300 users using Outlook ( Current Total = 2000 Users )
c. Mobile Phone users ( IPhone / HTC )   = These users will be the same 
users in point 2 but I would probably say not even 500 users will be given 
company phones for this purpose.

Those 2000 users mentioned above in (b) will also have DAG enabled Database and 
will spread them accross 3 servers. All servers will be in the single AD site, 
same physical Data Center and subnet.

I hope by this discussion I will get a firm understanding of how many servers 
we will need & what roles will reside on which servers.

3. But are there any guidelines that the name for OWA / ecp etcshould not 
be the same as the RPC ARrray ?

4. My impression was exchange 2010 generates a self signed ssl at the time of 
the install or is this a manual task for SSL / TLS ?

8. I am beginning to read up on this one :)  "Set-OutlookProvider"  :) I 
hope this is the answer to all our problems for Outlook configuration.


Thank you so much and looking forward for some ideas. :)

cheers

Jim



On 3 January 2011 17:16, Michael B. Smith 
mailto:mich...@smithcons.com>> wrote:
Soa detailed design of this magnitude is not something I would attempt to 
do via email. That being said, you've obviously done lots of investigation 
already, which is a good thing. I'd recommend you sit down with someone who has 
done a migration this large and spend a couple of days coming up with a 
detailed plan.

I think you don't need that many servers based on 15K users.  I'd probably go 
with four HT/CAS combinations.

[1] what's your RTO? What, if anything is your backup speed/mechanism? That's 
the questions that defines the answer.

[2] Depends on your user mix. If everyone is Outlook and you want one CAS to be 
able to handle the load of two CAS in case of h/w failure, I'd probably look at 
limiting my NORMAL active user count to around 4,000. What you want to watch 
out for is TCP port exhaustion. 4K users is probably going to sit around 25K 
ports, 8K users about 50K ports, which stil

Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[helpdesk UK]

This is not an option.

The firm pays for books + exam cost that's all !!!

I don't want this post to turn into a moaning session about the place I work
at; some like it that way in the team. There is no pressure in giving exams
and things have not moved a great deal for us.

Now we have bought a few books as we need it and we are getting up to speed.

The skills sets in our team we are fairly confident we can deliver this
project. In some cases we have over spec'd the solution as opposed to under
spec it to be on the safe side. :(

Thanks

Jim






On 4 January 2011 14:14, Maglinger, Paul  wrote:

>  I would propose that if they are unwilling to bring in outside help, then
> it becomes more important that your group receive some kind of training
> beforehand.  Depending on  your Microsoft agreement, there may be funds
> available to offset some of the cost of migration as well as training
> dollars!
>
>
>
> -Paul
>
>
>
> *From:* helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:02 AM
>
> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
>
>
>
> I completely agree with your comments and I would not do that either but
> the fact is as follows...simply to convince management that we need to get
> it right & has been a massive challenge itself but they have agreed on one
> condition that internal IT would have to design and implement this solution.
> Getting external companies involved is not possible due to the cost. I guess
> the IT Director is trying to justify our jobs & savings as we are going
> through redundancy due to a merger in all depts. :(
>
>
>
> So as a team of 5 we have to perform 100% !!!
>
> So coming back to your comments are fantastic some information I could not
> find anywhere :)
>
>
>
> So when you  "four HT/CAS combinations" say do you mean a combined role
> installation ? The number of users could double within two years would that
> still be recommended approach OR should we stick to a distributed approach ?
>
>
>
> 1. RTO : This will be D2D2T (T = Tape Library) solution using veritas. We
> are also considering a  de-duplicator but that is being discussed.
>
>
>
> 2.  User mix this was amazing question it completely slipped out of my mind
> ?
>
> Three types of Users we will provide service for are as follows:
>
>
>
> Based on 10K Users
>
> 
>
>
>
> a. OWA Users= 8 k (
> They will use only OWA internally and while at home )
>
> b. Outlook Users   = Per site
> we will have approx 300 users using Outlook ( Current Total = 2000 Users )
>
> c. Mobile Phone users ( IPhone / HTC )   = These users will be the same
> users in point 2 but I would probably say not even 500 users will be given
> company phones for this purpose.
>
>
>
> Those 2000 users mentioned above in (b) will also have DAG enabled Database
> and will spread them accross 3 servers. All servers will be in the single AD
> site, same physical Data Center and subnet.
>
>
>
> I hope by this discussion I will get a firm understanding of how many
> servers we will need & what roles will reside on which servers.
>
>
>
> 3. But are there any guidelines that the name for OWA / ecp etcshould
> not be the same as the RPC ARrray ?
>
>
>
> 4. My impression was exchange 2010 generates a self signed ssl at the time
> of the install or is this a manual task for SSL / TLS ?
>
>
>
> 8. I am beginning to read up on this one :)  "Set-OutlookProvider"  :)
> I hope this is the answer to all our problems for Outlook configuration.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you so much and looking forward for some ideas. :)
>
>
>
> cheers
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3 January 2011 17:16, Michael B. Smith  wrote:
>
> So….a detailed design of this magnitude is not something I would attempt to
> do via email. That being said, you’ve obviously done lots of investigation
> already, which is a good thing. I’d recommend you sit down with someone who
> has done a migration this large and spend a couple of days coming up with a
> detailed plan.
>
>
>
> I think you don’t need that many servers based on 15K users.  I’d probably
> go with four HT/CAS combinations.
>
>
>
> [1] what’s your RTO? What, if anything is your backup speed/mechanism?
> That’s the questions that defines the answer.
>
>
>
> [2] Depends on your user mix. If everyone is Outlook and you want one CAS
> to be able to handle the load of two CAS in case of h/w failure, I’d
> probably look at limiting my NORMAL active user count to around 4,000. What
> you want to watch out for is TCP port exhaustion. 4K users is probably going
> to sit around 25K ports, 8K users about 50K ports, which still gives you a
> little headroom for multi-mailbox users. Bumping that to 5,000 is too many.
> On the other hand, if everyone is using OWA, that’s one port per CAS and if
> you size your hardware right, you can support 20K users o

RE: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[Maglinger, Paul]

I would propose that if they are unwilling to bring in outside help, then it 
becomes more important that your group receive some kind of training 
beforehand.  Depending on  your Microsoft agreement, there may be funds 
available to offset some of the cost of migration as well as training dollars!

-Paul

From: helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:02 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

I completely agree with your comments and I would not do that either but the 
fact is as follows...simply to convince management that we need to get it right 
& has been a massive challenge itself but they have agreed on one condition 
that internal IT would have to design and implement this solution. Getting 
external companies involved is not possible due to the cost. I guess the IT 
Director is trying to justify our jobs & savings as we are going through 
redundancy due to a merger in all depts. :(

So as a team of 5 we have to perform 100% !!!
So coming back to your comments are fantastic some information I could not find 
anywhere :)

So when you  "four HT/CAS combinations" say do you mean a combined role 
installation ? The number of users could double within two years would that 
still be recommended approach OR should we stick to a distributed approach ?

1. RTO : This will be D2D2T (T = Tape Library) solution using veritas. We are 
also considering a  de-duplicator but that is being discussed.

2.  User mix this was amazing question it completely slipped out of my mind ?
Three types of Users we will provide service for are as follows:

Based on 10K Users


a. OWA Users= 8 k ( They 
will use only OWA internally and while at home )
b. Outlook Users   = Per site we 
will have approx 300 users using Outlook ( Current Total = 2000 Users )
c. Mobile Phone users ( IPhone / HTC )   = These users will be the same 
users in point 2 but I would probably say not even 500 users will be given 
company phones for this purpose.

Those 2000 users mentioned above in (b) will also have DAG enabled Database and 
will spread them accross 3 servers. All servers will be in the single AD site, 
same physical Data Center and subnet.

I hope by this discussion I will get a firm understanding of how many servers 
we will need & what roles will reside on which servers.

3. But are there any guidelines that the name for OWA / ecp etcshould not 
be the same as the RPC ARrray ?

4. My impression was exchange 2010 generates a self signed ssl at the time of 
the install or is this a manual task for SSL / TLS ?

8. I am beginning to read up on this one :)  "Set-OutlookProvider"  :) I 
hope this is the answer to all our problems for Outlook configuration.


Thank you so much and looking forward for some ideas. :)

cheers

Jim



On 3 January 2011 17:16, Michael B. Smith 
mailto:mich...@smithcons.com>> wrote:
Soa detailed design of this magnitude is not something I would attempt to 
do via email. That being said, you've obviously done lots of investigation 
already, which is a good thing. I'd recommend you sit down with someone who has 
done a migration this large and spend a couple of days coming up with a 
detailed plan.

I think you don't need that many servers based on 15K users.  I'd probably go 
with four HT/CAS combinations.

[1] what's your RTO? What, if anything is your backup speed/mechanism? That's 
the questions that defines the answer.

[2] Depends on your user mix. If everyone is Outlook and you want one CAS to be 
able to handle the load of two CAS in case of h/w failure, I'd probably look at 
limiting my NORMAL active user count to around 4,000. What you want to watch 
out for is TCP port exhaustion. 4K users is probably going to sit around 25K 
ports, 8K users about 50K ports, which still gives you a little headroom for 
multi-mailbox users. Bumping that to 5,000 is too many. On the other hand, if 
everyone is using OWA, that's one port per CAS and if you size your hardware 
right, you can support 20K users on that CAS.

Note: Outlook uses about six TCP ports per mailbox. Doesn't matter whether 
Outlook Anywhere or MAPI; it's still about six ports. Every additional mailbox 
that you have Outlook open adds ANOTHER six ports. So, if your normal 
configuration is to have every user open their own mailbox plus a shared 
mailbox, you've just cut your headcount that can be served by a single CAS in 
half.

[3] as long as you configure all the internal and external URI's properly, 
Exchange doesn't care.

[4] You need your OWA name, your autodiscover name, and I like to add my SMTP 
name. That's it. You must have (minimally) a self-signed certificate on every 
hub so that every hub can communicate with every other hub and MB server using 
SSL/TLS. All communications are encrypted.

[8] proper configuration of y

RE: Self send spam & Black berry.

[John Cook]

Most AV/As programs start with your contacts as a white list - it's an easy way 
to reduce false positives. Some of these programs also make your white list 
part of a universal white list for the company. If your email gets spoofed it's 
automatically allowed and I don't know about your L-Users but mine actually 
click on messages like "click here to facilitate your scheduled password 
change". It's just a good habit to minimize exposure.

 John W. Cook
System Administrator
Partnership For Strong Families
5950 NW 1st Place
Gainesville, Fl 32607
Cell (352) 215-6944
MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS, CompTIA A+, N+, VSP4, VTSP4

From: Liby Philip Mathew [mailto:lmat...@path-solutions.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 1:28 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Self send spam & Black berry.

Hi John,
Can you please explain this.  I don't want to mess up the mail flow:).

Regards

Liby Philip Mathew | ICT Consultant
ICT Professional Services
Path Solutions
Tel: +965 24824600 Ext. 703
Fax: +965 24824500
www.path-solutions.com

From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org]
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:30 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Self send spam & Black berry.

And never ever put yourself in your own contacts!

 John W. Cook
System Administrator
Partnership For Strong Families
5950 NW 1st Place
Gainesville, Fl 32607
Cell (352) 215-6944
MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS, CompTIA A+, N+, VSP4, VTSP4

From: greg.swe...@actsconsulting.net [mailto:greg.swe...@actsconsulting.net]
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:28 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Self send spam & Black berry.

You have to accept email from everyone if its your corporate mail server.  
That's how Email works..

Now to filter those connections..
You need to turn on RBL Block lists and use
Zen.spamhaus.org
Bl.spamcop.net (optional)

Here is a good place to start with the built in mail filtering tools for 
Exchange 2007
http://www.msexchange.org/articles_tutorials/exchange-server-2007/security-message-hygiene/exchange-server-2007-spam-filtering-features-without-using-exchange-server-2007-edge-server.html

Otherwise you need to look at spam filtering on the server or hosted.  The list 
server host has a good program, but it takes resources and loads directly onto 
your server.  Search the archives there are lots of posts on the subject.

Greg Sweers
CEO
ACTS360.com
P.O. Box 1193
Brandon, FL  33509
813-657-0849 Office
813-758-6850 Cell
813-341-1270 Fax

From: Liby Philip Mathew [mailto:lmat...@path-solutions.com]
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 3:35 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Self send spam & Black berry.

Hi,
I have Exchange 2007 SP2 RU5 with all roles on a single server except EDGE on a 
different server on DMZ separated by an ISA.
Lately users are getting as lot of self send spam.  So after googling, I 
removed Ms-Exch-SMTP-Accept-Any-Recipient from the EDGE server using the below 
command.  The spam stopped.  But users using Black Berry started complaining.  
How can I strike a balance between both stopping self send spam and allowing 
users to use Black Berry to send their mails.  We don't have a BIS.
Any help appreciated.

Get-ReceiveConnector "Receive Connector Name" | Remove-ADPermission -User "NT 
AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON" -ExtendedRights "Ms-Exch-SMTP-Accept-Any-Recipient"
Regards

Liby Philip Mathew | ICT Consultant



Disclaimer
[The information contained in this e-mail message and any attached files are 
confidential information and intended solely for the use of the individual or 
entity to whom they are addressed. This transmission may contain information 
that is privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable 
law. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and delete all copies. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein 
is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Path Solutions accepts no responsibility for any 
errors, omissions, computer viruses and other defects.]

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist


CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or 
attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), 
confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, 
dissemination, or other use of, and taking any act

Re: Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.

[helpdesk UK]

I completely agree with your comments and I would not do that either but the
fact is as follows...simply to convince management that we need to get it
right & has been a massive challenge itself but they have agreed on one
condition that internal IT would have to design and implement this solution.
Getting external companies involved is not possible due to the cost. I guess
the IT Director is trying to justify our jobs & savings as we are going
through redundancy due to a merger in all depts. :(

So as a team of 5 we have to perform 100% !!!
So coming back to your comments are fantastic some information I could not
find anywhere :)

So when you  "four HT/CAS combinations" say do you mean a combined role
installation ? The number of users could double within two years would that
still be recommended approach OR should we stick to a distributed approach ?

1. RTO : This will be D2D2T (T = Tape Library) solution using veritas. We
are also considering a  de-duplicator but that is being discussed.

2.  User mix this was amazing question it completely slipped out of my mind
?
Three types of Users we will provide service for are as follows:

Based on 10K Users


a. OWA Users= 8 k ( They
will use only OWA internally and while at home )
b. Outlook Users   = Per site we
will have approx 300 users using Outlook ( Current Total = 2000 Users )
c. Mobile Phone users ( IPhone / HTC )   = These users will be the same
users in point 2 but I would probably say not even 500 users will be given
company phones for this purpose.

Those 2000 users mentioned above in (b) will also have DAG enabled Database
and will spread them accross 3 servers. All servers will be in the single AD
site, same physical Data Center and subnet.

I hope by this discussion I will get a firm understanding of how many
servers we will need & what roles will reside on which servers.

3. But are there any guidelines that the name for OWA / ecp etcshould
not be the same as the RPC ARrray ?

4. My impression was exchange 2010 generates a self signed ssl at the time
of the install or is this a manual task for SSL / TLS ?

8. I am beginning to read up on this one :)  "Set-OutlookProvider"  :) I
hope this is the answer to all our problems for Outlook configuration.


Thank you so much and looking forward for some ideas. :)

cheers

Jim



On 3 January 2011 17:16, Michael B. Smith  wrote:

>  So….a detailed design of this magnitude is not something I would attempt
> to do via email. That being said, you’ve obviously done lots of
> investigation already, which is a good thing. I’d recommend you sit down
> with someone who has done a migration this large and spend a couple of days
> coming up with a detailed plan.
>
>
>
> I think you don’t need that many servers based on 15K users.  I’d probably
> go with four HT/CAS combinations.
>
>
>
> [1] what’s your RTO? What, if anything is your backup speed/mechanism?
> That’s the questions that defines the answer.
>
>
>
> [2] Depends on your user mix. If everyone is Outlook and you want one CAS
> to be able to handle the load of two CAS in case of h/w failure, I’d
> probably look at limiting my NORMAL active user count to around 4,000. What
> you want to watch out for is TCP port exhaustion. 4K users is probably going
> to sit around 25K ports, 8K users about 50K ports, which still gives you a
> little headroom for multi-mailbox users. Bumping that to 5,000 is too many.
> On the other hand, if everyone is using OWA, that’s one port per CAS and if
> you size your hardware right, you can support 20K users on that CAS.
>
>
>
> Note: Outlook uses about six TCP ports per mailbox. Doesn’t matter whether
> Outlook Anywhere or MAPI; it’s still about six ports. Every additional
> mailbox that you have Outlook open adds ANOTHER six ports. So, if your
> normal configuration is to have every user open their own mailbox plus a
> shared mailbox, you’ve just cut your headcount that can be served by a
> single CAS in half.
>
>
>
> [3] as long as you configure all the internal and external URI’s properly,
> Exchange doesn’t care.
>
>
>
> [4] You need your OWA name, your autodiscover name, and I like to add my
> SMTP name. That’s it. You must have (minimally) a self-signed certificate on
> every hub so that every hub can communicate with every other hub and MB
> server using SSL/TLS. All communications are encrypted.
>
>
>
> [8] proper configuration of your OutlookProviders (see Set-OutlookProvider)
> and autodiscover handle this.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Michael B. Smith
>
> Consultant and Exchange MVP
>
> http://TheEssentialExchange.com 
>
>
>
> *From:* helpdesk UK [mailto:uk.helpd...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, January 01, 2011 8:55 AM
> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Designing & Implementing Exchange 2010 in the new year.
>
>
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> Wish everyone a Happy New