|
Home > Archive > microsoft.public.exchange2000.admin > October 2002 > Exchange Servers in Multiple Domains
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Exchange Servers in Multiple Domains
|
|
| Tech Support 2002-10-05, 8:14 pm |
| Can anyone give me some pointers as to how I might manage two Exchange 2K
servers in two separate Forests? All user accounts must reside in Domain A
in Forest A. All Mailboxes (among other sorts of data) must reside in
Domain B in Forest B.
Domain A will have no access to Domain B at all. But, at the same time
there will be centralised user administration in Domain A.
Ideally, I would like to do away with Domain B altogether, but legal
considerations insist upon this sort of setup.
Just in case I haven't been clear, there will be one user base. They will
access mail on an Exchange server in Domain B, but their accounts (or
primary user accounts) will reside in Domain A.
The Mail Store in Domain B must be accessible with all functionality with
Outlook 2K. POP3 and IMAP access not an option.
Thanks ...
| |
| Mark Arnold (MVP) 2002-10-05, 8:15 pm |
| "Tech Support" <rmdeslauriers@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
>Can anyone give me some pointers as to how I might manage two Exchange 2K
>servers in two separate Forests? All user accounts must reside in Domain A
>in Forest A. All Mailboxes (among other sorts of data) must reside in
>Domain B in Forest B.
>
>Domain A will have no access to Domain B at all. But, at the same time
>there will be centralised user administration in Domain A.
>
>Ideally, I would like to do away with Domain B altogether, but legal
>considerations insist upon this sort of setup.
>
>Just in case I haven't been clear, there will be one user base. They will
>access mail on an Exchange server in Domain B, but their accounts (or
>primary user accounts) will reside in Domain A.
>
>The Mail Store in Domain B must be accessible with all functionality with
>Outlook 2K. POP3 and IMAP access not an option.
>
>Thanks ...
>
You're joking !
If domain A will have no access to Domain B as you say, how do you
propose to let users get their mail ?
If you must have only one set of credentials (Domain A) then there
needs to be some form of trust between A and B. Therefore there is
connectivity between A and B, thus breaking your legal obligations.
Time for a rethink and a reality check ?
Mark Arnold MCSE MVP
mark@mvps.org
Before U post...
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exchange.htm
http://www.swinc.com/resource/e2kfaq_appxc.htm
| |
| Ed Woodrick 2002-10-05, 8:15 pm |
| A Forest is a collection of accounts in a common directory. Multiple Forests
are situations when users don't see each other.
If the legal ramifications make you create two Forests, then they probably
also keep you from sharing information between the Forests.
BUT, in your situation, where user accounts will be in one Forest and
Exchange in another, it won't work. Exchange has to use a user account in
it's own Forest. Now you could create user accounts in both Forests, but
that would really be a bad idea.
"Tech Support" <rmdeslauriers@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote in message
news:#lGlmbSTCHA.1496@tkmsftngp11...
> Can anyone give me some pointers as to how I might manage two Exchange 2K
> servers in two separate Forests? All user accounts must reside in Domain
A
> in Forest A. All Mailboxes (among other sorts of data) must reside in
> Domain B in Forest B.
>
> Domain A will have no access to Domain B at all. But, at the same time
> there will be centralised user administration in Domain A.
>
> Ideally, I would like to do away with Domain B altogether, but legal
> considerations insist upon this sort of setup.
>
> Just in case I haven't been clear, there will be one user base. They will
> access mail on an Exchange server in Domain B, but their accounts (or
> primary user accounts) will reside in Domain A.
>
> The Mail Store in Domain B must be accessible with all functionality with
> Outlook 2K. POP3 and IMAP access not an option.
>
> Thanks ...
>
>
|
|
|
|
|