Exchange 2007

Anyone switch from 2000 or 2003 to 2007 yet?

I've just installed 2007 but have not yet transitioned all of my mailboxes and public folders over yet. I have some more configuration and baseline performance stuff to do before I make the leap. Not to mention, I'm coming from 2000 to 2007... I should have taken a class.

I'm going to stop by the local borders on my way in to at least pick up a book. Things have changed quite a bit since 2000 and 2003.

I'm ok with 2000 and 2003... but I have no idea how to use the power shell yet... and aparently, the GUI is built on the power shell and as usual, the GUI team didn't complete the GUI because of a rush to get this product to market. Mind you, I'm not afraid or opposed to the shell... I just have to learn how to use it. :)

What are you initial thoughts on 2007?
Is a transition/migration in the works?

I'll tell you one thing... I had to do a LOT of freaking work just to be able to install 2007. Not only that... some products don't even have full support for 2007 such as blackberry or some backup software. They have workarounds... but we all know how that turns out...

This should be quite an interesting project...

Why did you go ahead and upgrade to 2007 without firstly knowing what you were letting yourself in for?
Most companies, including ours, wont be upgrading for a good while yet, no need to.
If it aint broke dont fix it!

I didn't... it was decided by management and I was assigned the project...

We're moving to a Cisco VOIP solution and we needed either Exchange 2003 or 2007 for unified messenging capabilities. We had to upgrade from 2000 to either 2003 or 2007. Management decided to just skip 2003 and move to 2007...

Thats fine with me... this server I just installed is not going into production yet. It's more for me to learn and test it before we get these other solutions deployed.

Quote:

---

I didn't... it was decided by management and I was assigned the project...

---

lol. Yeah who would volunteer themselves for hours of book reading, headaches and late nights. ;) Unless it is an upgrade that really fixes a problem. But I'll tell you going from 2000 to 2003 I hardly ever have have an exchange issue anymore. The work you need to do to make sure everything is in place is long and exhausting but there for a reason. I tried a shortcut and trashed a mail box during a migration. It was mine thankfully. ;)

Word of advice, make sure every active directory connector on every domain controller and every device that uses one is upgraded with a new connector and ALL service packs before migration. Move ONE mailbox at a time until you get about 10 them move them all. I moved a bunch of small ones then a couple of big ones, verified everything was ok with the user then let it rip and moved a couple of hundred at once.

Right now I don't see a reason to upgrade to 2007. My deal with 2003 was the increased control and security. It does a better job at managing incomming spam and traffic etc but mostly for the mobile interface, Outlook Mobile Access, you should have it on 2007 and it should support Blackberry?

If not good.com offers a pretty cheap interface and it's more secure IMO than OMA because you don't have to open an inbound port. Plus you get visibility of the fleet who are traveling in other cities.

http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/ev...wa_mobile.mspx

http://www.blackberry.com/news/press..._10_2003.shtml

Thanks for the advice roadclosed. I'm creating a bunch of users and assigning them to our current exchange server and then creating some for the exchange 2007 server.

I'll begin moving the test accounts and whatnot before I even think about touching the real users and mailboxes. :) After I'm sure that it all works properly, then I will start moving them little by little.

I have plenty of time to get this rolled out. Well, a couple of months if I need it. I'm getting a head start on all of this so I don't run into huge problems and delay future projects. :)

Oh, I know what you mean on the Active Directory connections... I had some problems with them that had to be troubleshooted and fixed before I could introduce 2003 domain controllers. I have a couple of 2000 servers that are dual booted with 2003. I just need to demote those 2000 servers and bring them up as 2003 DCs. I don't feel comfortable with only one 2003 DC. It'll be fine for a week or so, but nothing I want to run long term.

I don't have approval to upgrade all of our 2000 DCs to 2003 yet... I'm sure that'll be a project for next year.

With the latest rounds of mergers we have to combine four seperate exchange environments and 4 seperate AD forests before we start to worry about 2007. We will also start to migrate all of our public folders from Exchange to sharepoint services as we know that within the next release or two of exchange it will no longer support public folders. I'm was suprised to find out that they ended up keeping public folders in exchange12. All of our hardware is exchange12 compatible though.

For small shops I don't see much of an improvement in 2007. Where it really helps is when you are trying to have more than 4000 users on a single server. And also in terms of doing 7x1 clusters and things of that nature. Also the 64 bit memory architecture is so much better than Exchange 2000/3. Overall I think the further deliniation of tasks between the different server types will be confusing for small shops, and helpful for large shops that take the time to properly design their environment.

Whomever made the decision to go to Exchange 2007 instead of migrating from 2000 to 2003 should be fired. Upgrading to 2003 is like installing a service pack. A real no-brainer upgrade.

Quote:

---

Whomever made the decision to go to Exchange 2007 instead of migrating from 2000 to 2003 should be fired. Upgrading to 2003 is like installing a service pack. A real no-brainer upgrade.

---

Sounds like he's deploying a new server, so it should just be a move once the domain is prepped? AS LONG as the AD connector on both boxes match the latest upgrade and the move happend from new box.

phish, the AD connector is what is used by exchange to connect to the user base. NEVER NEVER NEVER run exhange on a DC, so it needs a way to connect to the user settings and all that. 2003 adds tabs to the user propeties that don't exist in 2000. Working from memory here... so each connector you have, meaning anywhere that an Exchange System Manager is install MUST be upgraded. If you try to access Exchange without an upgraded connector BAD BAD BAD things happen. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoadClosed

NEVER NEVER NEVER run exhange on a DC

---

We are. The mess ive been cleaning up since starting is unreal!

Actually, I know why 2007 was chosen. I'm not worried about that. I could have upgraded to 2003 first, and then later transitioned to 2007... but why do it twice? We only had one exchange server, so it really wasn't a big deal. It is more of a learning curve as I didn't know much about 2007. I do now... I have 2007 running along with 2000. Both are sending mail fine to either internal and external addresses. I'm having two problems at the moment, and I'm pretty sure both of them are related to active directory related. One is with OWA on 2007 and the other is that exchange 2000 can't find the new test users I created in active directory and setup to use 2007. They are not listed in the directory lookup in outlook, but they show up when looking at users and computers or when running a query in AD for recipients. Does exchange 2000 have to have an updated active directory controller connector? I did a search but didn't find much about it. I'm off to research the other problem.

Ok, OWA problem fixed. You can't create mailboxes using active directory. It'll show up as a "legacy mailbox". You must just create the user account in AD and then enable the mailbox in the exchange mgt console. (EMS) Now, I just need to figure out why exchange 2000 can't see new users added since introducing a 2003 domain controller and exchange 2007 server.

Its not really that big of a deal though... Everything is going pretty smoothly. I can probably just start moving users over soon. Although... better safe than sorry.

As far as i know, Cisco unified messaging does not support Exchange 2007 yet.. pls verify before u implement...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mirkblood

As far as i know, Cisco unified messaging does not support Exchange 2007 yet.. pls verify before u implement...

---

Not with version 4.2 but it is supported by version 5.
That is one of the reasons we're going with Exchange 2007... because we'll be using Unity 5.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/...d805e6e12.html

Ok, the exchange 2000 server can now see the other users for some reason.
I did choose to rebuild RUS last night...

This morning, everything seems to be working fine. Maybe I just wasn't giving exchange 2000 enough time to update. The server is rather busy and has pretty old hardware compared to the 2007 server that is not in use.

Quote:

---

Ok, the exchange 2000 server can now see the other users for some reason.
I did choose to rebuild RUS last night...

---

Good, I was going to say some things in your other post didn't seem correct. You should be able to add users and mailboxes in AD. Your issue was exactly why I made a reference to updating ALL adciive directory connectors. And then Updating every Exchange System Management stations, even on Exchange 2000. ;)

Another crazy fix I have found related to mailboxes not being replicated is the new server gets confused which is the global catalog. This crappy fix involves shutting down all the DCs and the Exchange box. Then bringing the global catalog DC up first. Then waiting about 10 to 20 minutes. Then bringing up Exchange... wait 10 minutes then other DCs. In fact that is the order I do updates now.

Also sometimes the New exchange server or the old when is not set up to replicate in Exchange System Manager.

RoadClosed: In Exchange 2007, you CAN NOT create your mailboxes using Active Directory Users and Computers (ADUC) via exchange tasks. Well, you can, but it won't work properly.

Exchange 2007 will consider that a "legacy mailbox" and OWA will not work with it. Outlook will still open the mailbox, but the OWA won't work. The errors I had when trying to access the mailbox via OWA was because I used AD to create the mailboxes and not the EMS.

http://articles.techrepublic.com.com...1-6169714.html
http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/...007-Part1.html
http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/...007-Part2.html

Since I'm still using Exchange 2000 and also have Exchange 2007, when I created new test users, I was give the option of which server I wanted to create the mailbox on. When I choose the 2007 server and the store, the mailbox was created on the Exchange 2007 server, but as the wrong type.

I found a way to fix that... move the mailbox over to the 2000 server and then back to the 2007 server... but in my case, I can just delete the test accounts and recreate them the correct way.

You can still create mailboxes using ADUC IF you'll be storing them on Exchange 2000 or 2003. Then you can transition them to 2007. But, if you plan to store it on the 2007 server right away... then you have to use the 2007 EMC.

BTW: If you're going to buy a book on Exchange 2007... don't get this one.
I've only been reading it for 2 days and I've already found at least a half dozen mistakes or contradictions. :eek:
It's a good thing I didn't rely on this book as my only method for learning Exchage 2007.

It appears that they wrote this book on the beta version of 2007. Some of the commands they reference have been changed and some of options they use as far as configuration goes are either not there or have been combined. Even pictures they have screen shots of have changed...

This is one of the only books that I've ever had that problem with. Normally I just highlight in books. In this one, I'm literally crossing out whole lines and writing in what it should be. Hmm... I wonder if Borders will take it back? lol

Quote:

---

In Exchange 2007, you CAN NOT create your mailboxes using Active Directory Users and Computers (ADUC) via exchange tasks. Well, you can, but it won't work properly.

---

Hmm. I was always under the impression the 2007 was just a tweak. That is a major change in the core structure of the server architecture.

Quite a bit has changed actually... I've been doing a lot of learning about exchange lately.

I never had to do much in ways of administration. In the past 6 or 7 years we were running it, the only problem I had with it was a disk failure. That was hardware related and not related to Exchange itself. It was all setup and running when I joined the company. All I really had to do was manage backups, install service packs, patches, manage users and the mailboxes. Well, regular maintenance too...

I never had an official education on exchange. I knew enough to get by... I recently decided I better learn as much as possible about 2000 and 2003 over the last 2 or 3 months because I knew this upgrade was in the works and I would be responsible for it. I've been using CBT nuggets videos (search google... wide open archives ;) ) and reading books. Well, it was nice to know... but it seems it won't matter much soon. So much has changed. I really didn't need to learn all that about 2000 and 2003.

I've been reading a lot of stuff @
http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/...e_Server_2007/

I'm going to buy this book too. This guy really seems to know his stuff.

Yeah going from 2000 to 2003 is a learning experience but it is a huge jump from 2000 to 2007. You'll need to brush up on intelligent mail filtering and the new remote features most of all. I'm still on SBS2003. I eagerly await SBS2007.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoadClosed

Hmm. I was always under the impression the 2007 was just a tweak. That is a major change in the core structure of the server architecture.

---

2007 is a bigger difference in version from 2003 than what Exchange 5.5 to 2000 was... Primarily in that it requires 64bit hardware, and has a full fledged 64bit memory management system.

I'm also curious about what you mean by active directory connectors. I've seen you use that phrase several times. The ADC is only used to replicate information from AD to Exchange 5.5 organizations. Do you mean something other than the ADC?

Quote:

---

The ADC is only used to replicate information from AD to Exchange 5.5 organizations. Do you mean something other than the ADC?

---

That's not the way I see ADC and I think that replication piece is what I keep referring too as well. Since Exchange servers should not run on a DC they deploy a connector to manage mailboxes. As you know the mail information (at least prior to 07) is stored as an Active Directory Object. The AD Connector interfaces with Active directory and is required to manage exchange in addition to replication It adds the Active Directory Users and Computers interface basically.

Exchange 2003 alters the AD schema significantly. So if you have Exchange servers or management station that do not have an updated Connector you are in trouble when you try and integrate the new server. At least on 2003. And not just for 5.5, 2000 as well. I have exchange system managers on computers other than exchange servers for example. They require the connector and it's upgrades. I emphasise this because it caused me GREAT headaches and some data corruption. Assuming you try to move a box or modify exchange properties.

I am like you phish, I only manage exchange when I am forced to intervene. Everything I have learned is through sleepless nights. ;) I tried to take a formal class once, they are hard to find here. I am going to send someone though the next time I see one.

I am very surprised that 07 doesn't manage users through AD. That goes agaisnt centrilized repository of user information and the industry trends. You have to build a user on AD then on Exchange? Doesn't make sense to me at this point.

Might as well use Linux and LDAP. ;) Save money.

You can actually create your new users in Exchange using the EMC.
However, you can't copy users. I like use an existing user as a template.

All of the user and mailbox info is still stored in Active Directory. You just can't create the mailbox in the ADUC utility. Well, you can... but it doesn't create it properly. It creates the wrong type of mailbox. It will still work in outlook, but OWA won't work with it.

So, you can create your user in ADUC, then go to the EMC and add a new mailbox for the user. Or, you can go directly to the EMC and create a new mailbox but create the user at the same time. Then go back to ADUC and add the user to the correct sec and distribution groups.

Aparently, the reason you have to use the EMC instead of the ADUC is because of the way 2007 integrates with the powershell. Everything you do in the EMC simply executes a script in the exchange powershell. A lot of things actually have to be done in the shell as the GUI is not complete with the full set of options and commands.

SP1 is supposed to add a bunch of options to the GUI. Right now, you can't manage public folders... but come SP1, you can.

Does 2003 have the ability to create room or equipment mailboxes?

In 2007, when you create a maibox for a room or resource, it creates a user account but disables the user account.

I have a bunch of rooms and resources setup as user accounts. I haven't yet seen a way to transition those to 2007 and then convert them over to the room or resource type mailbox. I didn't look too hard though... right now I'm still just playing and testing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoadClosed

That's not the way I see ADC and I think that replication piece is what I keep referring too as well. Since Exchange servers should not run on a DC they deploy a connector to manage mailboxes. As you know the mail information (at least prior to 07) is stored as an Active Directory Object. The AD Connector interfaces with Active directory and is required to manage exchange in addition to replication It adds the Active Directory Users and Computers interface basically.

---

This is not an AD connector. The ADC is a very specific piece of software that replicates data from Windows 2000 AD to an Exchange5.5 directory service, dir.edb. Exchange makes all of its calls to AD using LDAP. There is no special connector that is installed. Sounds to me like you are trying to say that the ESM tool has some kind of connector. And while it does need to be updated to the proper version of exchange to read schema and AD information properly, this is not called a connector. Atleast not by MS or any reputable exchange engineer I have ever met.

Quote:

---

Exchange 2003 alters the AD schema significantly. So if you have Exchange servers or management station that do not have an updated Connector you are in trouble when you try and integrate the new server. At least on 2003. And not just for 5.5, 2000 as well. I have exchange system managers on computers other than exchange servers for example. They require the connector and it's upgrades. I emphasise this because it caused me GREAT headaches and some data corruption. Assuming you try to move a box or modify exchange properties.

---

Again, you just need to update ESM, you are calling this a connector and in reality that is a term you have made up. When you upgrade from outlook 2000 to outlook2003 you don't say you are upgrading your exchange connector.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ary/udadc.mspx

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../aa996243.aspx


It is a weird change that MS took away the ability to create a mailbox in AD-UAC. But you can create an AD user account and mailbox enable that account inside of the management console. But I think that is really a moot point. All of our mailboxes will be created through powershell scripts. Makes it very easy to create a mailbox provisioning website that creates an AD account and then mailbox enables that account. We do it right now with CDOEXM. I've not manually created a mailbox in years.

http://articles.techrepublic.com.com...1-6169714.html

Quote:

---

Again, you just need to update ESM, you are calling this a connector and in reality that is a term you have made up. When you upgrade from outlook 2000 to outlook2003 you don't say you are upgrading your exchange connector.

---

I might be a little off on nomenclature but I didn't make it up, when I had issues across my 3 servers MS kept using the term. And frankly I am a little pissed off about it. Because I have NEVER run a 5.5. At 5.5 I thought exchange was a joke. Anyway.. I dug out my books and read every single chapter that had ADC in it and it always refers to exactly what you mention. Replication from 5.5. I was under the assumption that ESM uses the ADC or what I call ADC to connect ESM to active directory. You say it's just LDAP. There are a ton of components in active directory so I have been using the wrong nomenclature apparently and when MS directed me to upgrade my ADC they were either thinking I had 5.5 or I misunderstood what they were saying.

So back to my original use of the term... make sure you upgrade all your ESM components. :D

//EDIT and you guys have convinced me there is no way in HELL I am going to upgrade to 2007. I would rather take the time to work out openexchange or groupware.

Well, I'm happy to say that the transition to Exchange 2007 has been going pretty smoothly. I've been pretty busy with other projects, so I'm only working on this here and there. I've also taken a small break in order to learn how to use the widows powershell.

Up until now, I was just creating test users to use Exchange 2000 and then transitioning them over to 2007. Seeing how it redirects the outlook client, blackberry desktop client and also if blackberry would even be able to send to the 2007 server. I was able to get many problems that I didn't know I would encounter fixed this way.

I've been able to get Exchange 2007 to work with the Blackberry server. I thought that was going to be the biggest issue. It was surprisingly easy. :)

I finally moved over a couple of production accounts and all seems to be working properly. :)

Now, I just need to get a good backup system in place and plan the rest of the transition. This is my first big project with Exchange... so I'm taking it very slow and doing a lot of research and learning. I'm glad I didn't wait too long to get started on this project. :)