Exchange 2000 and Active Directory can't be treated as separate islands in a system, according to AD expert Ratmir...
By submitting your email address, you agree to receive emails regarding relevant topic offers from TechTarget and its partners. You can withdraw your consent at any time. Contact TechTarget at 275 Grove Street, Newton, MA.
Timashev. While AD must be in place before Exchange 2000 can be deployed, Exchange's characteristics must be factored into the actual AD design.
In a recent SearchWindowsManageability interview, Timashev -- president and CEO of Aelita Software -- discussed the implications for single forest and multi-forest AD designs. In this SWM interview, Timashev explains the issues and challenges administrators might face with a multi forest AD design in Exchange 2000. In part two, he details setting up multi forest environments and the messaging systems within them.
|SWM:||Why is Exchange deployment an issue for AD design?|
It's an issue because Exchange 2000 integrates with Active Directory. Exchange 2000 uses AD for all directory-related operations, such as information storage and look-ups, replication and synchronization, but even the end-user e-mail experience relies on AD. For example, e-mail relies on AD for information about users, and AD is used to populate the Global Catalog, which is used as the Exchange 2000 address book.
|SWM:||What are some of the issues involved in setting up Exchange in a multi-forest AD design?|
With a multi-forest AD design, in which each forest has a separate AD service, you have to decide whether each forest should have its own Exchange organization or whether each forest will share a single Exchange organization. Each option will affect collaboration level, replication and other options you have. So at a high level, the main issues are collaboration, replication, and synchronization of data. Together, these issues affect the designs that can be implemented when setting up Exchange.
|SWM:||What are the main AD/Exchange designs that are possible?|
When deploying AD and Exchange, there are three main designs: single forest/single org, multi-forest/single org, and multi-forest/multi-org. Most companies select a single forest/single org (SF/SO) configuration during the early AD deployments. It is the simplest AD/Exchange structure. The whole AD consists of a single forest and that forest has a single Exchange 2000 organization installed in it as the messaging system.
|SWM:||How does each design increase/decrease collaboration capabilities?|
Native Microsoft tools support the single forest/single organization model. Having a single forest and Exchange 2000 organization means that all users have mailboxes within a single Exchange organization and access the same Public Folders, address book, and calendar information. In addition, all the replication tasks are handled by the native AD/Exchange mechanisms.
|SWM:||How does each design increase/decrease administrative cost?|
The single forest/single organization model offers the lowest administrative cost because it is the simplest design and because native Microsoft tools support this model. Having a single forest and Exchange 2000 organization also means that all the replication tasks are handled by the native AD/Exchange mechanisms.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Continue on to part two.
Read SWM's first interview with Timashev, "Single forest vs. multi-forest Active Directory design"