Well that's excellent news. I can't believe I misunderstood that. It makes
sense, I guess, if you turn it around. In my scenario three workers sharing
a single AD account would only have required one CAL for the account instead
of one for each human. And I always knew that wasn't the case.
As always, thank you very, very much.
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.comwrote:
I think you misunderstand how CALs work. IANAL. That being said, CALs are
either per-user or per-device. They are NOT per-account or per-mailbox. A
single user could, for example, have 50 mailboxes and a thousand AD
accounts. They still will only need one Windows Server CAL and one Exchange
Server CAL (and one Outlook license).
I wouldn’t even attempt to authoritatively speak on a hosted environment
without testing. My __guess__ is that you’d have to have one account for
each user/company combination.
However, Outlook 2010 completely simplifies this process. Outlook 2010
allows you to connect to multiple Exchange mailboxes in a single
Outlook/MAPI profile. Each mailbox can have an individual identity and they
are handled for you. The solution doesn’t even require Exchange 2010; just
Outlook 2010.
You’ll have one mailbox per user/company combination. Load’em each up into
Outlook. Works fine. Tastes great. Less filling.
If you need more information about how CALs work, see
http://microsoft.com/licensing. You can also place a telephone call to a
Microsoft licensing specialist. You don’t have to identify yourself or your
company and the call is free (at least in the United States).
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
*From:* Richard Stovall [mailto:rich...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 21, 2010 12:19 PM
*To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
*Subject:* Segregating multiple Exchange e-mail addresses in Outlook
(Apologies for the length of this message.)
We are a small Exchange 2003 shop with several companies working under the
same roof. Several of our employees present themselves publicly as
representatives of more than one company. For example, Bob T. Salesrep
works for two companies and must keep his outward presentation such that
customers of company A only see e-mail from CompanyA.com and customers of
Company B only see messages from CompanyB.com. My preference has always
been to have separate Outlook profiles for each brand. There is almost zero
chance of accidentally sending messages from the wrong e-mail address if
there is a hard wall between accounts. Until I read about ExtraOutlook
(thanks Ken Schaefer) I always thought that using multiple Outlook profiles
meant having only one instance of Outlook open at a time, which is a pain.
I have one user who likes using ExtraOutlook, but the others refuse to do
so for some reason.
A previous admin devised a scheme for using POP via a separate account
created in Outlook to retrieve mail for the secondary accounts. This does
work in that it collects all the mail into one mailbox and replys are
directed from the correct sender. Original e-mails must be sent by choosing
the correct account.
And to the point. I'm looking at upgrading to Exchange 2010. Obviously
each AD account will continue to require a server CAL and an Exchange CAL if
we stay with on premise Exchange and the current setup. For those users
with multiple identities (that does seem accurate sometimes, btw) this means
two CALs of each type. Are there any changes in Exchange/Outlook 2010 that
would allow this subset of users to accomplish what they need without
requiring multiple CALs? In the past I have created DGs for the secondary
accounts and given Send As permission to the users' AD account. This kept
the CAL count down, but everyone hated it b/c it was too confusing and did
not deal with issues such as replying to incoming mail without manually
changing the sender every time the replies needed to go out under the
address associated with the DG.
The other reason I'm asking is because I'm also considering moving to a
hosted solution. It would definitely push us beyond the limit of
affordability if two monthly recurring charges were required for each person
representing more than one company. Does anyone have any experience with
hosted Exchange and a situation similar to this?
Thanks for any suggestions or comments,
RS
