I only have one server to play with, ~60 users at the most. is there any benefit of deploying a front-end server in this situation, and would it work to virtualise the front and back-endexchange servers on the one physical server?

Scott,Maybe take a look at this. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996980(EXCHG.65).aspxThis describe the different topology for Front End and Back End. The benefit is mostly you can firewall off the front end that has the web components from the back end that shouldn't be exposed. You can virtualize them on the same physical server but then if you lose that 1 physical server you lose both your Exchange servers. That's not specific to Exchange that is all VMs, if you don't have some sort of redundancy but is still worth pointing out. Mark Morowczynskihttp://almostdailytech.com

right, we just have very few servers here to play with. Cant you punch a whole in the firewall th let port 25 through? Also is microsoft virtual server the best solution to virtualize the servers if I can not only use the one server?

Scott,Yea you can punch a whole in the firewall for port 25 but more ports are generally used than that to talk back and forth. Take a look at that guide. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996980(EXCHG.65).aspxI dont think it really matters, I'm more familar with VMWare ESX but I know others that use the Hyper-V. It's prolly more down to cost, Hyper-V is free and HA features, ESX has more. Mark Morowczynski,http://almostdailytech.com

Supplement: Hype-Vs system requirement: In addition to the systems requirement for Windows Server 2008, the two key requirements for the Hyper-V platform are the need to ensure that the server is a 64-bit environment and supports hardware-assisted virtualization (Intel VT or AMD-V) technology Yes, Hype-V can save cost. If you are interested to this technology, this Hype-V FAQ is a good start Heres the benefits of FE/BE topology