Exchange on Member Server or Domain Controller 1

[iolair]

Since I'm new to Exchange and don't know the answer to this stupid question, is it common practice to put Exchange on a member server or a domain controller. Or, does it matter? Using Exchange 2000 on Windows 2000 Standard. Thanks.

Iolair MacWalter
Director of IT

 

[jpmtjr]

If at all possible the Exchange application should be on a member server (unless it's an MS Small Business Server where everything is on the same machine).

 

[iolair]

Thank you. I can do that, as I have a pair of domain controllers all ready on the network. We do have a small network (55 users), but I didn't know how much redundancy I needed, and if Exchange required a DC on the same machine it's on. thanks again.

Iolair MacWalter
Director of IT

 

[LWComputingMVP]

Small Business Server (SBS) is an exception as it must do everything that it comes with itself - you can't offload certain functionality.

But, if it's not SBS, then jpmtjr is correct. Here's a more detailed description, relating to 2003 (but Exchange 2000 and 2003 are similar in how they work, so it should apply to both):

http://blogs.brnets.com/michael/archive/2005/01/24/319.aspx

 

[Zelandakh]

It isn't "recommended" to put it on a DC barring the above mentioned SBS, but it does speed up directory lookups if the Exchange box is a GC. A good number of Exchange installations are on domain controllers but it becomes problematic when you want to do certain things to the domain which is why it is not supported.

 

[LWComputingMVP]

Actually, it IS supported - it's just not recommended.

 

[Zelandakh]

I meant recommended, but for some reason my hands typed supported. Duh.

 

[58sniper]

The big problem, other than startup and shutdown issues, is that if the GC functions fail on the DC that Exchange is on, Exchange won't look to any other GC.

And, you can't demote or promote a server once Exchange is on it.

Pat Richard, MCSE MCSA:Messaging CNA
Microsoft Exchange MVP
Want to know how email works? Read for yourself -

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt

 

[iolair]

Good. Thanks. Next dumb question - how many users can you run on SBS? I have a small network, 55 nodes, and wonder if I could just run everything in one place. I have a Dell Poweredge 2850, with 2 GB ram and 140GB of disk space configured as a RAID 5 array (three 72GB SCSI HDDs)

Iolair

Iolair MacWalter
Director of IT

 

[lifegard2]

With 55 nodes, I personally wouldn't run SBS. Exchange, while an awesome mail server, is a resource hog.

 

[LWComputingMVP]

It's not clear - is it 55 nodes (computers and network devices, including printers, managed switches, etc) or is 55 users?

If it's 55 users, you're getting close to the SBS 2003 limitation and you're over the SBS 2000 limit of 50 connections. So if this is the case, you need to be looking at migrating AWAY from SBS. In which case, I would recommend multiple servers (exactly how many depends on your business model and needs).

 

[iolair]

Thanks. Yes, I have 55 users. I have 14 printers, and a wireless access point. So, I guess I need to build more servers. Ah, those good old days of one server and DOS on every workstation...........................

Iolair MacWalter
Director of IT

 

[lifegard2]

ok, definitely would not use SBS then.

Yes, the good ol days when viruses were just something you heard about and didn't battle everyday, and spyware wasn't a term we yet knew. . .