I know. Its more political than anything else.
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 3:42 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange Design Recomendation
That doesn't require a subdomain.
It simply requires that you put a particular
We are about to merge our 2000 user sister company into our Active Directory.
We have always had a single domain architecture and now are wanting to move to
a multidomain architecture so the sister company's admins can still manage
their resources. So I am looking for design ideas.
I think
What kind of management is required on the Exchange servers is required by
the admins in the sister company?
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:41 AM, Mayo, Shay shay.m...@absg.com wrote:
We are about to merge our 2000 user sister company into our Active
Directory. We have always had a single domain
Issues
Subject: Re: Exchange Design Recomendation
What kind of management is required on the Exchange servers is required by the
admins in the sister company?
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:41 AM, Mayo, Shay
shay.m...@absg.commailto:shay.m...@absg.com wrote:
We are about to merge our 2000 user sister
Issues
*Subject:* Re: Exchange Design Recomendation
What kind of management is required on the Exchange servers is required by
the admins in the sister company?
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:41 AM, Mayo, Shay shay.m...@absg.com wrote:
We are about to merge our 2000 user sister company
.
From: Mayo, Shay [shay.m...@absg.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 2:04 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange Design Recomendation
For the most part, we want them to be able to fully admin their exchange
servers. I think we want them to be able to manage their servers but make
, there are rarely reasons for subdomains anymore.
From: Mayo, Shay [shay.m...@absg.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 2:04 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange Design Recomendation
For the most part, we want them to be able to fully admin
