RE: Virtualisation structural question
Doesn't even have to be non-profits. Under our EA, DC costs about the same as Enterprise. Obviously we have to buy more licenses for each individual box, but with quad and hex core CPUs now, you don't have to buy many... Cheers Ken -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, 16 June 2010 1:22 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Virtualisation structural question On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 9:18 AM, John Cook john.c...@pfsf.org wrote: And if you're a non profit Datacenter is a no brainer. A single cpu of DC edition for us is under (don't hate me...) $400! [blank stare] [splutter] [goes cross-eyed] -- Ben ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~
RE: Virtualisation structural question
If you buy CPU licenses of Data Center Server you can run as many as you want. From: Jon Harris [mailto:jk.har...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 5:08 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Virtualisation structural question If you purchase the Enterprise version of 2k8 R2 I think it comes with 4 virtual licenses. That would allow for: VM Host on physical machine DC1 on Virtual machine 1 DC2 on Virtual machine 2 Exchange server on Virtual machine 3 File server on Virtual machine 4 The only think I have never done is machine 3. I don't do nor have I ever touched Exchange but I did have a TechNet person tell me that it was a supported configuration but depending on what you have running on the front end of Exchange you would need a really beefy Host to support it but that would be more for someone Exchange orientated than me to say. Jon On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Oliver Marshall oliver.marsh...@g2support.com wrote: I'd love to but we dont have enough licenses. -- G2 Support Network Support : Online Backups : Server Management Web: www.g2support.com http://www.g2support.com/ Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: www.g2support.com/newsletter From: Malcolm Reitz [mailto:malcolm.re...@live.com] Sent: 14 June 2010 16:29 To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Virtualisation structural question I would prefer to run the host as VM host only. I would also create 3 VMs - DC, file, Exchange. I don't like to mix file services in to a domain controller as it creates security administration issues. -Malcolm From: Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 06:15 To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Virtualisation structural question Hi chaps. Can I kick some thoughts around here and look for some comments? We have a few old servers that we need to upgrade to new versions. Basically we will be upgrading several Windows 2003 servers running file services, AD and Exchange 2003. We will be replacing these with 2008 64bit R2 servers running Exchange 2010. As running Exchange 2010 on a DC isn't recommended (though it appears that it isn't not-supported as such) we are looking at having two servers; one for AD and file roles and one for Exchange roles. Clearly this lends itself to virtualisation quite nicely with both 'servers' running on a parent host. The question is really this: Should the AD/File roles run in a VM or on the parent host itself, with Exchange being a child VM on the parent host ? So this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host Domain: Workgroup VM Name: AD-1 Role: DC/GC/FILE Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN Or this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host, DC/GC/FILE Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN My feeling is that the former is neater, that is with both the AD server and the Exchange server being VMs on a parent host, than the latter. Any suggestions? How are you chaps structuring things ? Olly Network Support Online Backups Server Management Tel: 0845 307 3443 Email: oliver.marsh...@g2support.com Web: http://www.g2support.com http://www.g2support.com/ Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: http://www.g2support.com/newsletter http://www.g2support.com/newsletter Mail: 2 Roundhill Road, Brighton, Sussex, BN2 3RF G2 Support LLP is registered at Mill House, 103 Holmes Avenue, HOVE BN3 7LE. Our registered company number is OC316341. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.jpgimage002.png
Re: Virtualisation structural question
Yes but Enterprise is a bit less expensive than Data Center. Jon On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 9:03 AM, N Parr npar...@mortonind.com wrote: If you buy CPU licenses of Data Center Server you can run as many as you want. -- *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:jk.har...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Monday, June 14, 2010 5:08 PM *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Virtualisation structural question If you purchase the Enterprise version of 2k8 R2 I think it comes with 4 virtual licenses. That would allow for: VM Host on physical machine DC1 on Virtual machine 1 DC2 on Virtual machine 2 Exchange server on Virtual machine 3 File server on Virtual machine 4 The only think I have never done is machine 3. I don't do nor have I ever touched Exchange but I did have a TechNet person tell me that it was a supported configuration but depending on what you have running on the front end of Exchange you would need a really beefy Host to support it but that would be more for someone Exchange orientated than me to say. Jon On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Oliver Marshall oliver.marsh...@g2support.com wrote: I'd love to but we dont have enough licenses. -- G2 Support Network Support : Online Backups : Server Management Web: www.g2support.com Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: www.g2support.com/newsletter *From:* Malcolm Reitz [mailto:malcolm.re...@live.com] *Sent:* 14 June 2010 16:29 *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Virtualisation structural question I would prefer to run the host as VM host only. I would also create 3 VMs – DC, file, Exchange. I don’t like to mix file services in to a domain controller as it creates security administration issues. -Malcolm *From:* Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] *Sent:* Monday, June 14, 2010 06:15 *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* Virtualisation structural question Hi chaps. Can I kick some thoughts around here and look for some comments? We have a few old servers that we need to upgrade to new versions. Basically we will be upgrading several Windows 2003 servers running file services, AD and Exchange 2003. We will be replacing these with 2008 64bit R2 servers running Exchange 2010. As running Exchange 2010 on a DC isn't recommended (though it appears that it isn't not-supported as such) we are looking at having two servers; one for AD and file roles and one for Exchange roles. Clearly this lends itself to virtualisation quite nicely with both 'servers' running on a parent host. The question is really this: Should the AD/File roles run in a VM or on the parent host itself, with Exchange being a child VM on the parent host ? So this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host Domain: Workgroup VM Name: AD-1 Role: DC/GC/FILE Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN Or this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host, DC/GC/FILE Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN My feeling is that the former is neater, that is with both the AD server and the Exchange server being VMs on a parent host, than the latter. Any suggestions? How are you chaps structuring things ? Olly Network Support Online Backups Server Management Tel: 0845 307 3443 Email: oliver.marsh...@g2support.com Web: http://www.g2support.com Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: http://www.g2support.com/newsletter Mail: 2 Roundhill Road, Brighton, Sussex, BN2 3RF G2 Support LLP is registered at Mill House, 103 Holmes Avenue, HOVE BN3 7LE. Our registered company number is OC316341. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image002.pngimage001.jpg
Re: Virtualisation structural question
Yes, but it depends on the size of the box. If you're building or purchasing a box that can only support 5 or 6 VMs, then DataCenter is overkill. If you're building a box that can support 15-20+ VMs, then you'll save tremendously by going with DataCenter because that will be the only OS license you need. (CALs sold separately. Some assembly required.) -ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Jon Harris jk.har...@gmail.com wrote: Yes but Enterprise is a bit less expensive than Data Center. Jon On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 9:03 AM, N Parr npar...@mortonind.com wrote: If you buy CPU licenses of Data Center Server you can run as many as you want. -- *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:jk.har...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Monday, June 14, 2010 5:08 PM *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Virtualisation structural question If you purchase the Enterprise version of 2k8 R2 I think it comes with 4 virtual licenses. That would allow for: VM Host on physical machine DC1 on Virtual machine 1 DC2 on Virtual machine 2 Exchange server on Virtual machine 3 File server on Virtual machine 4 The only think I have never done is machine 3. I don't do nor have I ever touched Exchange but I did have a TechNet person tell me that it was a supported configuration but depending on what you have running on the front end of Exchange you would need a really beefy Host to support it but that would be more for someone Exchange orientated than me to say. Jon On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Oliver Marshall oliver.marsh...@g2support.com wrote: I'd love to but we dont have enough licenses. -- G2 Support Network Support : Online Backups : Server Management Web: www.g2support.com Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: www.g2support.com/newsletter *From:* Malcolm Reitz [mailto:malcolm.re...@live.com] *Sent:* 14 June 2010 16:29 *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Virtualisation structural question I would prefer to run the host as VM host only. I would also create 3 VMs – DC, file, Exchange. I don’t like to mix file services in to a domain controller as it creates security administration issues. -Malcolm *From:* Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] *Sent:* Monday, June 14, 2010 06:15 *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* Virtualisation structural question Hi chaps. Can I kick some thoughts around here and look for some comments? We have a few old servers that we need to upgrade to new versions. Basically we will be upgrading several Windows 2003 servers running file services, AD and Exchange 2003. We will be replacing these with 2008 64bit R2 servers running Exchange 2010. As running Exchange 2010 on a DC isn't recommended (though it appears that it isn't not-supported as such) we are looking at having two servers; one for AD and file roles and one for Exchange roles. Clearly this lends itself to virtualisation quite nicely with both 'servers' running on a parent host. The question is really this: Should the AD/File roles run in a VM or on the parent host itself, with Exchange being a child VM on the parent host ? So this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host Domain: Workgroup VM Name: AD-1 Role: DC/GC/FILE Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN Or this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host, DC/GC/FILE Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN My feeling is that the former is neater, that is with both the AD server and the Exchange server being VMs on a parent host, than the latter. Any suggestions? How are you chaps structuring things ? Olly Network Support Online Backups Server Management Tel: 0845 307 3443 Email: oliver.marsh...@g2support.com Web: http://www.g2support.com Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: http://www.g2support.com/newsletter Mail: 2 Roundhill Road, Brighton, Sussex, BN2 3RF G2 Support LLP is registered at Mill House, 103 Holmes Avenue, HOVE BN3 7LE. Our registered company number is OC316341. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image002.pngimage001.jpg
Re: Virtualisation structural question
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 9:18 AM, John Cook john.c...@pfsf.org wrote: And if you’re a non profit Datacenter is a no brainer. A single cpu of DC edition for us is under (don’t hate me…) $400! [blank stare] [splutter] [goes cross-eyed] -- Ben ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~
Re: Virtualisation structural question
I would make the AD its own VM. On the off chance that you need to do something with AD that requires a reboot you don't have to reboot everything (also makes life easier in the future) The one caveat to this is you want to set the priority so AD boots before Exchange (I assume hyper-v gives you this ability). -Mike - Original Message - From: Oliver Marshall oliver.marsh...@g2support.com To: NT System Admin Issues ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 7:14 AM Subject: Virtualisation structural question Hi chaps. Can I kick some thoughts around here and look for some comments? We have a few old servers that we need to upgrade to new versions. Basically we will be upgrading several Windows 2003 servers running file services, AD and Exchange 2003. We will be replacing these with 2008 64bit R2 servers running Exchange 2010. As running Exchange 2010 on a DC isn't recommended (though it appears that it isn't not-supported as such) we are looking at having two servers; one for AD and file roles and one for Exchange roles. Clearly this lends itself to virtualisation quite nicely with both 'servers' running on a parent host. The question is really this: Should the AD/File roles run in a VM or on the parent host itself, with Exchange being a child VM on the parent host ? So this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host Domain: Workgroup VM Name: AD-1 Role: DC/GC/FILE Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN Or this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host, DC/GC/FILE Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN My feeling is that the former is neater, that is with both the AD server and the Exchange server being VMs on a parent host, than the latter. Any suggestions? How are you chaps structuring things ? Olly [cid:personal27e87.jpg] [cid:g2supportsmall_250x58border390c.png] Network Support Online Backups Server Management Tel: 0845 307 3443 Email: oliver.marsh...@g2support.com Web: http://www.g2support.comhttp://www.g2support.com/ Twitter: g2supporthttp://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: http://www.g2support.com/newsletter Mail: 2 Roundhill Road, Brighton, Sussex, BN2 3RF G2 Support LLP is registered at Mill House, 103 Holmes Avenue, HOVE BN3 7LE. Our registered company number is OC316341. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~
RE: Virtualisation structural question
I would prefer to run the host as VM host only. I would also create 3 VMs - DC, file, Exchange. I don't like to mix file services in to a domain controller as it creates security administration issues. -Malcolm From: Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 06:15 To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Virtualisation structural question Hi chaps. Can I kick some thoughts around here and look for some comments? We have a few old servers that we need to upgrade to new versions. Basically we will be upgrading several Windows 2003 servers running file services, AD and Exchange 2003. We will be replacing these with 2008 64bit R2 servers running Exchange 2010. As running Exchange 2010 on a DC isn't recommended (though it appears that it isn't not-supported as such) we are looking at having two servers; one for AD and file roles and one for Exchange roles. Clearly this lends itself to virtualisation quite nicely with both 'servers' running on a parent host. The question is really this: Should the AD/File roles run in a VM or on the parent host itself, with Exchange being a child VM on the parent host ? So this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host Domain: Workgroup VM Name: AD-1 Role: DC/GC/FILE Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN Or this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host, DC/GC/FILE Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN My feeling is that the former is neater, that is with both the AD server and the Exchange server being VMs on a parent host, than the latter. Any suggestions? How are you chaps structuring things ? Olly Network Support Online Backups Server Management Tel: 0845 307 3443 Email: oliver.marsh...@g2support.com Web: http://www.g2support.com/ http://www.g2support.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support g2support Newsletter: http://www.g2support.com/newsletter http://www.g2support.com/newsletter Mail: 2 Roundhill Road, Brighton, Sussex, BN2 3RF G2 Support LLP is registered at Mill House, 103 Holmes Avenue, HOVE BN3 7LE. Our registered company number is OC316341. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.jpgimage003.png
RE: Virtualisation structural question
I'd love to but we dont have enough licenses. -- G2 Support Network Support : Online Backups : Server Management Web: www.g2support.com Twitter: g2supporthttp://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: www.g2support.com/newsletterhttp://www.g2support.com/newsletter From: Malcolm Reitz [mailto:malcolm.re...@live.com] Sent: 14 June 2010 16:29 To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Virtualisation structural question I would prefer to run the host as VM host only. I would also create 3 VMs - DC, file, Exchange. I don't like to mix file services in to a domain controller as it creates security administration issues. -Malcolm From: Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 06:15 To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Virtualisation structural question Hi chaps. Can I kick some thoughts around here and look for some comments? We have a few old servers that we need to upgrade to new versions. Basically we will be upgrading several Windows 2003 servers running file services, AD and Exchange 2003. We will be replacing these with 2008 64bit R2 servers running Exchange 2010. As running Exchange 2010 on a DC isn't recommended (though it appears that it isn't not-supported as such) we are looking at having two servers; one for AD and file roles and one for Exchange roles. Clearly this lends itself to virtualisation quite nicely with both 'servers' running on a parent host. The question is really this: Should the AD/File roles run in a VM or on the parent host itself, with Exchange being a child VM on the parent host ? So this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host Domain: Workgroup VM Name: AD-1 Role: DC/GC/FILE Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN Or this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host, DC/GC/FILE Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN My feeling is that the former is neater, that is with both the AD server and the Exchange server being VMs on a parent host, than the latter. Any suggestions? How are you chaps structuring things ? Olly [cid:image002.png@01CB0BE3.4C96BCE0] Network Support Online Backups Server Management Tel: 0845 307 3443 Email: oliver.marsh...@g2support.commailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com Web: http://www.g2support.comhttp://www.g2support.com/ Twitter: g2supporthttp://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: http://www.g2support.com/newsletter Mail: 2 Roundhill Road, Brighton, Sussex, BN2 3RF G2 Support LLP is registered at Mill House, 103 Holmes Avenue, HOVE BN3 7LE. Our registered company number is OC316341. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~inline: image001.jpginline: image002.png
Re: Virtualisation structural question
What licenses don't you have enough of? What virtualization technology will you be using? If Hyper-V, then use Enterprise Edition of Windows, and you'll have 4 guest OS licenses for your use. You would be well recommended to take advantage of this opportunity to run those services on separate boxes. Even at home I run them on separate systems. -ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Oliver Marshall oliver.marsh...@g2support.com wrote: I'd love to but we dont have enough licenses. -- G2 Support Network Support : Online Backups : Server Management Web: www.g2support.com Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: www.g2support.com/newsletter *From:* Malcolm Reitz [mailto:malcolm.re...@live.com] *Sent:* 14 June 2010 16:29 *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Virtualisation structural question I would prefer to run the host as VM host only. I would also create 3 VMs – DC, file, Exchange. I don’t like to mix file services in to a domain controller as it creates security administration issues. -Malcolm *From:* Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] *Sent:* Monday, June 14, 2010 06:15 *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* Virtualisation structural question Hi chaps. Can I kick some thoughts around here and look for some comments? We have a few old servers that we need to upgrade to new versions. Basically we will be upgrading several Windows 2003 servers running file services, AD and Exchange 2003. We will be replacing these with 2008 64bit R2 servers running Exchange 2010. As running Exchange 2010 on a DC isn't recommended (though it appears that it isn't not-supported as such) we are looking at having two servers; one for AD and file roles and one for Exchange roles. Clearly this lends itself to virtualisation quite nicely with both 'servers' running on a parent host. The question is really this: Should the AD/File roles run in a VM or on the parent host itself, with Exchange being a child VM on the parent host ? So this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host Domain: Workgroup VM Name: AD-1 Role: DC/GC/FILE Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN Or this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host, DC/GC/FILE Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN My feeling is that the former is neater, that is with both the AD server and the Exchange server being VMs on a parent host, than the latter. Any suggestions? How are you chaps structuring things ? Olly Network Support Online Backups Server Management Tel: 0845 307 3443 Email: oliver.marsh...@g2support.com Web: http://www.g2support.com Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: http://www.g2support.com/newsletter Mail: 2 Roundhill Road, Brighton, Sussex, BN2 3RF G2 Support LLP is registered at Mill House, 103 Holmes Avenue, HOVE BN3 7LE. Our registered company number is OC316341. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image002.pngimage001.jpg
Re: Virtualisation structural question
If you purchase the Enterprise version of 2k8 R2 I think it comes with 4 virtual licenses. That would allow for: VM Host on physical machine DC1 on Virtual machine 1 DC2 on Virtual machine 2 Exchange server on Virtual machine 3 File server on Virtual machine 4 The only think I have never done is machine 3. I don't do nor have I ever touched Exchange but I did have a TechNet person tell me that it was a supported configuration but depending on what you have running on the front end of Exchange you would need a really beefy Host to support it but that would be more for someone Exchange orientated than me to say. Jon On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Oliver Marshall oliver.marsh...@g2support.com wrote: I'd love to but we dont have enough licenses. -- G2 Support Network Support : Online Backups : Server Management Web: www.g2support.com Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: www.g2support.com/newsletter *From:* Malcolm Reitz [mailto:malcolm.re...@live.com] *Sent:* 14 June 2010 16:29 *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Virtualisation structural question I would prefer to run the host as VM host only. I would also create 3 VMs – DC, file, Exchange. I don’t like to mix file services in to a domain controller as it creates security administration issues. -Malcolm *From:* Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] *Sent:* Monday, June 14, 2010 06:15 *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* Virtualisation structural question Hi chaps. Can I kick some thoughts around here and look for some comments? We have a few old servers that we need to upgrade to new versions. Basically we will be upgrading several Windows 2003 servers running file services, AD and Exchange 2003. We will be replacing these with 2008 64bit R2 servers running Exchange 2010. As running Exchange 2010 on a DC isn't recommended (though it appears that it isn't not-supported as such) we are looking at having two servers; one for AD and file roles and one for Exchange roles. Clearly this lends itself to virtualisation quite nicely with both 'servers' running on a parent host. The question is really this: Should the AD/File roles run in a VM or on the parent host itself, with Exchange being a child VM on the parent host ? So this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host Domain: Workgroup VM Name: AD-1 Role: DC/GC/FILE Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN Or this; Physical Host: VM-HOST1 Roles: Hyper-V Host, DC/GC/FILE Domain: MYDOMAIN VM Name: EX-1 Roles: Exchange 2010 Host: VM-HOST1 Domain: MYDOMAIN My feeling is that the former is neater, that is with both the AD server and the Exchange server being VMs on a parent host, than the latter. Any suggestions? How are you chaps structuring things ? Olly Network Support Online Backups Server Management Tel: 0845 307 3443 Email: oliver.marsh...@g2support.com Web: http://www.g2support.com Twitter: g2support http://twitter.com/home?stat...@g2support Newsletter: http://www.g2support.com/newsletter Mail: 2 Roundhill Road, Brighton, Sussex, BN2 3RF G2 Support LLP is registered at Mill House, 103 Holmes Avenue, HOVE BN3 7LE. Our registered company number is OC316341. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.jpgimage002.png
