Routing or Link State Information On Co-existence Between  Ex2003 and  Ex 2007
Hi Team i have a setup in my test lab, currently that is single Domain, two Exchange server 2003 , with two AG. both the Email flow is perfectly Ok. i had created a routing group connector between the two exchange server for email flow. NOW. i would like to implement Exchange server 2007 for co-existence with Exchange server 2003 as i have many public folders on it. By default all the public folders are located in first Exchnage server where i installed. Both the Exchange server in same site How can i implement and how the email flow will happen? Do i required to suppress the Link state from Exchange server 2003 before installing the Exchange server HT server. first Exchange 2007 Hub Transport server is installed into an existing Exchange 2003 organization, We must select an Exchange 2003 bridgehead server to which the routing group connector should establish a connection. (Correct me if am wrong: if i select the First Exchange server 2003 here, The email flow between the First Exchange server and Server 2007 will happen, What will happened to my second Exchange server 2003 email flow between Exchange server 2003 and 2007. Do i need to configure the new routing connectors in Exchange r 2007 H.T server ? Please help and thanks in Advance.
October 30th, 2010 12:03pm

On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 15:59:11 +0000, rush2ramki wrote: > > >Hi Team > >i have a setup in my test lab, currently that is single Domain, two Exchange server 2003 , with two AG. both the Email flow is perfectly Ok. i had created a routing group connector between the two exchange server for email flow. NOW. i would like to implement Exchange server 2007 for co-existence with Exchange server 2003 as i have many public folders on it. By default all the public folders are located in first Exchnage server where i installed. Both the Exchange server in same site > >How can i implement and how the email flow will happen? Do i required to suppress the Link state from Exchange server 2003 before installing the Exchange server HT server. You use the "new-routinggroupconnector" cmdlet to create the RGC between E2K7 and one of the E2K3 servers in one of the routing groups. You should suppress the minor link state replication, but if your topology doesn't place the E2K7 between two E2K3 routing groups that are already connected it probably won't matter. If you're unclear about why it should be suppressed then suppress it. "<==>" represents a RGC below: This should be okay: E2K3-1 <==> E2K3-2 <==> E2K7 This should be okay: E2K3-1 <==> E2K7 <==> E2K3-2 This would be bad: E2K3-1 <==> E2K7 <==> E2K3-2 ^ ^ | | +------ <==> ---------+ > first Exchange 2007 Hub Transport server is installed into an existing Exchange 2003 organization, We must select an Exchange 2003 bridgehead server to which the routing group connector should establish a connection. (Correct me if am wrong: if i select the First Exchange server 2003 here, The email flow between the First Exchange server and Server 2007 will happen, What will happened to my second Exchange server 2003 email flow between Exchange server 2003 and 2007. There won't be any. The mail flow will be from the bridgehead server in on E2K3 routing group to the other E2K3 routing group and then from that E2K3 routing group to the E2K7 bridgehead server (just as in the 1st example above). >Do i need to configure the new routing connectors in Exchange r 2007 H.T server ? You can, but you don't have to. --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
October 30th, 2010 5:15pm

Thanks Rich... Once i installed a hub transport server, it was asked for E2k3 email routing. i had givn the E2k3 Sys1 for the same and email flow is normal..Users in the E2k3 can send the email to the users who are in e2k7 servers and Vice versa... Thanks a lot... I had 3 more doubts after installing the E2k7 in existing E2k3 Environment. Let me ask later..!! Till then bye and Take care.
November 2nd, 2010 11:31am

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other recent topics Other recent topics