It's a Windows 2000 single forest domain and all users have e-mail addresses of email@example.com. Apparently,...
this was doable with Exchange 5.5, but not with Exchange 2000. I installed a certificate on the "master" Exchange 2000 server and it works fine, but users whose mailboxes reside on the second server can't use it.
There are two pieces of good news I can give you. One is that certificates for your Exchange servers do not have to cost a fortune. You can shop around for cheaper third-party certificate authorities (CA), or you can even configure one of your existing servers in your domain as a Windows CA. The other good news is that the Standard Edition of Exchange Server 2003 can be used as front-end servers. This is significantly cheaper then the Enterprise Edition that we were required to use with Exchange 2000 Server. And, front-end server hardware generally does not cost nearly has much as back-end servers, because there are virtually no disk storage requirements beyond the OS and the Exchange application. Finally, Exchange 2003 front-end servers are backwards compatible with Exchange 2000 back-end servers.
Do you have comments on this Ask the Expert question and response? Let us know.
Related Q&A from Richard Luckett
Exchange was running low on space, and Outlook asked if I wanted to archive my email messages. What will happen if I do that?continue reading
We need to move more than 20,000 Exchange 2010 public folders to Exchange 2013. What's the best way to do this?continue reading
I'm migrating Exchange 2010 mailboxes to Exchange 2013. How will Outlook clients know the mailboxes moved after the migration?continue reading
Have a question for an expert?
Please add a title for your question
Get answers from a TechTarget expert on whatever's puzzling you.