Hi GroupI am about to pen an article describing how best to go about deploying Excahnge 2007 in my organisation.I've recently read the TechNet article by Patricia DiGamcomo Eddy which describes an Overview of Namespace Planning. I've not left myself a bit confused.To give you an example of our toplogy we have the following AD domainsCompany.LANTrustedsite.ComDutchSite.ComWe also have an old NT domain in Germany called GMBH that isnt trusted.All clients access there email from a single server based in the HQ site, we have a dedicated private network linking all sites, not the fastest network i would like to add.Within company.lan i also have a remote site in France, they still log onto company.lan though.All internet traffic is bounced through HQ (where web filtering etc is applied)my initial thoughts are to remove the trusted site as its no longer neededand make it part of company.lan. All users on this site use company.com as there mail address.Next install a DC in Germany and make it part of company.lan. All users in this site use company.de as there mail addressesNext is to install a DC in Holland and make it part of company.lan. All users in this site use company.nl as there mail addressesOur france site already has a DC and is a member of company.lan, all users in this site use company-france.com as there mail addresses.To me this looks like a variation of the Regional Name Spaces and single namespace with proxy sites, but with a single site name. I may be miss understanding this though.I think it's basically deploy the DC's as described, register MX records for each regional site to point to my mail server (all done apart from the dutch at the moment) and then look to migrate to exchange 2007 from 2003. Then maybe deploy remote exchange servers at sites with more users??There is no regional technical managment of these sites it is all done from HQ. HQ's domain is windows 2003Any advice here would be greatly appreciated

hi,please look at; there are ten important point about installing exchange server 2007;http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996011.aspxand look at ; CAS Proxying and Redirection;http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/09/04/446918.aspxname space planning for exchange server 2007;http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb885052.aspxregards,Exchange - MVP | www.cozumpark.com | www.mumincicek.com

So, your thought is to integrate all into Company.LAN with different Sites for different regions, right? HQ Site (Internet facing) Trusted Site (@company.com for mail address) France Site (@company-france.com for mail address) German Site (@company.de for mail address) Holland Site (@company.nl for mail address) Quote: To me this looks like a variation of the Regional Name Spaces and single namespace with proxy sites According to Overview of Namespace Planning, I think that the model you used is still the Regional Name Spaces, its just that you only have one site (HQ) to face the internet What do you mean about with a single site name? Do you mean with single internet-facing CAS? Quote: register MX records for each regional site to point to my mail server In one exchange environment, DNS A record is used to communicate between different sites, why do you use MX record? Quote: Then maybe deploy remote exchange servers at sites with more users Whats the current exchange server role in all sites above?

Hi James thanks for getting back to me.Quote: register MX records for each regional site to point to my mail serverI need to change the external MX records for the Holland site as this points to a ISP mail server and the clients connect via pop to collect email.Basically point user@company.nl to our current external IP address for the Exchange server Quote: Then maybe deploy remote exchange servers at sites with more users We only have 1 exchange server within the organisation, all users collect their mail over the internal dedicated network. We dont have many users at these others sites, just small offices. Apart from Germay were we have over 20 users and may be of use to have a local Exchange server acting as a 'local back end' or 'slave', not sure of the termonology for thisQuote: "What do you mean about with a single site name? my understanding of Regional Site Names is that they all have local internet access. My scenario does use this model but all sites come through the HQ for internet. Actually upon re-reading the DNS article listed above it does look like a regional namespace model