Exchange Server Forums

Domain and Forest Functional Level Question

Users viewing this topic: none

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Microsoft Exchange 2007] >> Installation >> Domain and Forest Functional Level Question

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Limited time MSExchange.org offer! -- 1.Sep.2008 1:00:00 PM

TechGenix and SolarWinds have partnered to provide free copies of SolarWinds Exchange Monitor to all visitors who join the MSExchange.org Forums. SolarWinds Exchange Monitor is a handy desktop dashboard that continuously monitors Microsoft Exchange to deliver real-time insight into Exchange services, mail queue sizes, and host server health. Learn more about Exchange Monitor and the free offer!

Domain and Forest Functional Level Question - 24.Jul.2008 5:51:23 PM

sostew

Posts: 3
Joined: 24.Jul.2008
Status: offline

Hello all,

A resource forest topology for Exchange 2007 requires the resource forest to be native 2003 and the domain at least native 2000. Is this correct? Furhermore, do the account forests have to be native 2003 or and the domains native 2000 or higher as well or can they be mixed mode?

If I create a resource domain for Exchange 2007, will I have to raise the function level of my account domains to native mode?

Post #: 1

Featured Links*

RE: Domain and Forest Functional Level Question - 24.Jul.2008 5:58:09 PM

mark@mvps.org

Posts: 3785
Joined: 9.Jun.2004
From: Philadelphia PA
Status: online

Everything has to be native.

Any reason why this is a deal for your environment, or just curious?

_____________________________

Mark Arnold (Exchange MVP)
List Moderator

(in reply to sostew)

Post #: 2

RE: Domain and Forest Functional Level Question - 24.Jul.2008 6:19:46 PM

sostew

Posts: 3
Joined: 24.Jul.2008
Status: offline

We have two devisions of the compay that each have a seperate forest. The forests and domains are in mixed mode. The users exist within the domains in each forest. The idea was to have the Exchange 2007 server in the resource forest with linked mailboxes. This will validate or invalidate the design. The question is will we need to raise the level of these domains/forest?

Thanks

(in reply to mark@mvps.org)

Post #: 3

RE: Domain and Forest Functional Level Question - 24.Jul.2008 8:08:58 PM

mark@mvps.org

Posts: 3785
Joined: 9.Jun.2004
From: Philadelphia PA
Status: online

Needs to be native, particularly in that scenario.
So you have two divisions but plan on using Exchange servers in only one of them. You know you haven't got a "resource" and "account" forest, right?
Who has been advising you on your AD design? It seems a little half baked in terms of you using different forests for different divisions (perfectly fine on its own) but then you talk about resource forests and linked mailboxes. That design makes no sense and needs addressing.

_____________________________

Mark Arnold (Exchange MVP)
List Moderator

(in reply to sostew)

Post #: 4

RE: Domain and Forest Functional Level Question - 24.Jul.2008 8:43:01 PM

sostew

Posts: 3
Joined: 24.Jul.2008
Status: offline

We would love to collapse our forests into one, but the business has decided that separation of divisions is best. I'll outline a couple more things in hopes of getting more detailed advice.

We have two divisions within the company. For us, that means two separate sets of employees, IT staff and two separate AD forests. We are upgrading to Exchange 2007 and even though we are separate divisions the Email will be shared by both divisions. We want to create one resource forest for Exchange 2007 and leave the two individual sets of users from each division in their respective forests. We would then create linked mailboxes in Exchange 2007 for the users in each account forest.

This led us to asked the original question. Would the account forests/domains need to be in native mode as well as the resource forest/domain?

Thanks for any recommendations or advice.

(in reply to mark@mvps.org)

Post #: 5

RE: Domain and Forest Functional Level Question - 24.Jul.2008 8:52:30 PM

mark@mvps.org

Posts: 3785
Joined: 9.Jun.2004
From: Philadelphia PA
Status: online

You need to engage some Identity and Access consultants because you are trying to solve an age old problem with age old methods. I'd call in the Oxford Computer Group to give you decent AD advice.

You do not need Exchange advice. If you want to do it the old way then set both to native, done, finished, move on. If you want to add some intelligence and solution elegance then talk so some AD people.

You do not have an Exchange problem, you have an AD control and management problem. Fix that.

_____________________________

Mark Arnold (Exchange MVP)
List Moderator

(in reply to sostew)

Post #: 6

RE: Domain and Forest Functional Level Question - 25.Jul.2008 1:00:58 PM

jreicher2

Posts: 1
Joined: 25.Jul.2008
Status: offline

What is the need in a resource forest topology to have the account forests to be in native mode? Since the schema extensions and distro lists are held in the resource forest, what do you lose by not having all of your account forests native?

Also, I think the original poster of this thread was looking at having 2 seperate account forests/domains which are for political/business reasons and have 1 resource forest service the email for both account forests in one unified Exch Org.

(in reply to mark@mvps.org)

Post #: 7