General discussion

Locked

Front End/BE Exchange 2003 topology over

By solonow ·
I am planning to put a FE exchange server. The back End server is located over a slow link.
(There is only one Exchange server in the ORG). What are the benefit of having a FE server....
Some of the benefit I Know...1) you can do directory lookup in AD - Reduces overhead. 2) Use of SSL encrypt - decrypt 3)Better security benefit (you do not expose your back End Exchange server. My question is what kind of topology /architecture will allow you to reduce traffic(or performance) between the FE and BE server. Thank you in advance for all your support ?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

5 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

MS Stupidity,

by djameson In reply to Front End/BE Exchange 200 ...

build seperate exchange servers at each site, they can be linked together and you can use a Bridghead server if you would like, but you really don't have to with AD, you can turn them up and move mailboxes from one store to another and it just works (Provided that you install them correctly)

Collapse -

by solonow In reply to MS Stupidity,

There is no any user where I am thinking to put the FE Server, therfore ther will not be any mailbox at all. It just make like easy when people traveland to reduce extra hops. The FE server is located in the US and the BE in another country over a satellite link. (And remmber there is only one Back End Exchange server). The FE will be in DMZ. I think I did not make my question clear.

Collapse -

by solonow In reply to MS Stupidity,

There is no any user where I am thinking to put the FE Server, therfore ther will not be any mailbox at all. It just make like easy when people traveland to reduce extra hops. The FE server is located in the US and the BE in another country over a satellite link. (And remmber there is only one Back End Exchange server). The FE will be in DMZ. I think I did not make my question clear.

Collapse -

exchange web

by djameson In reply to

use the exchange web and poke a pinhole in your f.w port 80 is a lot easier to protect then the 30 or so ports that outlook uses to access exchange, also... You still have to authenticate and you still have to move emails across the system. I don't see how a Frontend server will make it any more secure, or provide any less latency.

Collapse -

FE not way to go for this problem

by gjacknow In reply to Front End/BE Exchange 200 ...

You should use a front end server to centralize access to many back end servers or put an OWA server with SSL enabled in the DMZ, or a couple of other reasons that do NOT apply hear.

It really would not help with access over a slow wan link.

You have 3 things you can do to improve acceess for users at the remote site.

1. Increase bandwidth of link.
2. Get appliance to compress and/or optimize traffic over WAN link (I have read these help a lot)
3. Put another exchange server in the remote site and move mailboxes of users that work there to that server. You now have less trafic going over the WAN link from users getting mail. (but a little mre replication traffic for exchange servers)

Keep in mind the exchange server in the remote site wants to talk to a DC (and GC) so you should have one locally.

Greg J

Back to Software Forum
5 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  

Related Discussions

Related Forums