Migrating from 2007-2010 Exchange

Tags:

In my last blog post I covered the migration process from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2010. In this post, I’m going to outline the sequence and provide tips, tricks, and best practices to look forward to in the migration process from Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2010.

Since Exchange 2010 is similar if not almost identical to Exchange 2007 in terms of server roles (CAS, Hub Transport, Mailbox, Edge), if you implemented Exchange 2007 in a manner that suits the needs of your organization, then your transition to Exchange 2010 will be pretty straight forward. Effectively, you would add Exchange 2010 server roles to mirror the Exchange 2007 server roles you have today (ie: if you have 2 CAS/2007 servers today, you’d likely build up 2 CAS/2010 servers in the Exchange 2010 environment, etc).

The sequence for a migration from Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2010 is as follows:

Upgrade all Exchange Servers to Exchange Server 2007 Service Pack 2.
Bring the AD forest and domains to Windows Server 2003 Functional (or higher) levels.
Upgrade at least one Global Catalog domain controller in each AD Site that will house Exchange Server to Windows Server 2003 SP2 or greater.
Prepare a Windows Server 2008 (RTM or R2) x64 edition server for the first Exchange 2010 server.
Install the AD LDIFDE tools on the new Exchange 2010 server (to upgrade the schema).
Install any necessary prerequisites (WWW for CAS server role).
Run setup on the Exchange 2010 server, upgrade the schema, and prepare the forest and domains. (Setup runs all in one step or separate at the command line.)
Install CAS server role servers and configure per 2010 design. Validate function-ality.
Transfer OWA, ActiveSync, and Outlook Anywhere traffic to new CAS servers.
Install Hub Transport role and configure per 2010 design.
Transfer inbound and outbound mail traffic to the 2010 HT servers.
Install Mailbox servers and configure Databases (DAG if needed).
Create public folder replicas on Exchange 2010 servers using AddReplicatoPFRe-cursive.ps1or Exchange 2010 Public Folder tool.
Move mailboxes to Exchange 2010 using Move Mailbox Wizard or Powershell.
Rehome the Offline Address Book (OAB) generation server to Exchange Server 2010.
Transfer all Public Folder Replicas to Exchange Server 2010 Public folder store(s).
Delete Public and Private Information Stores from Exchange 2007 server(s).
Uninstall all Exchange 2007 servers.
One of the areas of change that you’ll make with your transition to Exchange 2010 that is different than in your Exchange 2007 implementation is the high availability and disaster recovery functions of your Mailbox server role. Because the concepts of Single Copy Clusters, Cluster Continous Replication (CCR), and Standby Continous Replicaton (SCR) no longer exist in Exchange 2010, you’ll be transitioning your mailboxes off of Exchange 2007 that has these functions to Exchange 2010 that users Database Availability Groups (DAGs). Of course if you are just migrating to a single Exchange 2010 Mailbox server with no high availability or disaster recovery, then you will just have mailbox databases that you’ll be moving your mailboxes to. However for organizations implementing high availability and disaster recovery, the DAGs provide replication of mail (of up 16 copies) from server to server. When you setup your Exchange 2010 Mailbox servers to prepare them for the transition of mailboxes, setup your DAG replication and test your failover and failback of Exchange 2010 Mailbox servers, and then move your mailboxes to the DAG(s).

Another area of change between Exchange 2007 and Exchange 2010 is that ALL client connections go through the CAS server(s). Unlike Exchange 2007 and prior where OWA connections went through the CAS server but Outlook (2003/2007) connections actually communicated directly over MAPI to the backend Mailbox servers. However with Exchange 2010, client systems no longer communicate directly to the backend Mailbox servers. Instead, the client MAPI connections hit the CAS server(s) that then communicate with the Mailbox servers on the backend. So just like in the shift to Hub Transport servers in Exchange 2007 where all mail routes through the Hub Transport servers (incoming mail, outgoing mail, user to user mail between servers, and even user to user mail between users on the same server), with Exchange 2010, all clients go through the CAS server(s). As such, the CAS servers take on more of a performance load and need to be beefed up a little. Our recommendations for CAS to Mailbox in Exchange 2007 was 1 CAS servers for every 2 Mailbox servers. For Exchange 2010, our recommendation is now 3 CAS servers for every 4 Mailbox servers. Most organizations have at least 2 CAS servers in their environment for redundancy, and because you can virtualize the CAS role plus have 2000, 3000, even 5000 mailboxes on a single Mailbox server, we typically find this 3:4 CAS:MBX ratio hasn’t been a showstopper for organizations in terms of a design change.

Also important to note is that all 2007 server roles (CAS, Hub Transport, Mailbox) in Exchange 2007 need to remain until all users are migrated to Exchange 2010. Exchange 2010 CAS, Hub Transport, and Mailbox servers are not backwards compatible with Exchange 2007, so in order for a user to access Outlook Web Access on Exchange 2007, they need to still hit the Exchange 2007 CAS servers to access their mailbox on the Exchange 2007 Mailbox server. After their mailbox is migrated to Exchange 2010, then the user will hit the Exchange 2010 CAS server and access their mailbox on the Exchange 2010 Mailbox server. Because Exchange 2010 has a proxy service on the CAS server, your external URL for OWA can point to the Exchange 2010 CAS server and if the user’s mailbox is still on Exchange 2007, the CAS/2010 server will automatically redirect the client connection to the CAS/2007 server for OWA.

Lastly, after moving mailboxes off of Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2010, leave the Exchange 2007 infrastructure in place for a couple (2) weeks. By leaving the old Exchange 2007 server(s) in place, when an Outlook client tries to connect to the old Exchange 2007 server for its mail, the old Exchange 2007 server will notify the Outlook client software that the user’s mail has been moved to the Exchange 2010 server and will automatically update the user’s Outlook profile with the new destination server information. Thereafter, when the Outlook client is launched, Outlook will access the user’s mailbox on the new Exchange 2010 server. By leaving the old Exchange 2007 infrastructure in place for a couple weeks, pretty much all of your users will launch Outlook to have the profile automatically changed thus requiring no client system intervention during the migration process. The only users you will likely need to manually reset their Outlook profile are users who are on extended leave and had not accessed their Outlook mail during the 2 week time that you had the Exchange 2007 environment still in place.

Hopefully these steps are helping in providing you guidance in your migration from Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2010. I cover the migration process in much more detail (including specific steps and step by step processes for cutting over CAS, Hub Transport, and Mailbox server roles) in my book “Exchange 2010 Unleashed” from Sams Publishing. The book was written from 2-yrs of early adopter experience working with Exchange 2010 and will hopefully provide more detailed guidance on the migration process from Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2010.

I’ve been ask to blog information about the new Hub Transport “Shadow Redundancy” process that provides fault tolerance to the routing of mail through Hub Transport servers, as well as I’ve been asked to blog about the new Exchange 2010 Unified Messaging (voicemail), so I’ll put together my thoughts on those areas upcoming…

Why or Why not place Exchange Servers in a DMZ Zone

Tags:

A lot of confusion exists about placing Microsoft Exchange servers in a network demilitarized zone (DMZ). Questions range from whether you should place Exchange servers in the DMZ to how you configure such servers. This week, I discuss the reasons you might locate Exchange servers in the DMZ and some protective measures you need to take if you do.

If you make any Exchange services available over the Internet, you need to set up an Exchange server in the DMZ. For example, if your Exchange server accepts inbound SMTP mail from the Internet, you must provide an SMTP connection to your Exchange server. Also, many companies place front-end Outlook Web Access (OWA) servers in the DMZ to let users access their mailboxes over a secure HTTP connection. If your organization requires news feeds (through Network News Transfer Protocol—NNTP), you might need an NNTP presence in your DMZ. Other services that might require an Exchange service in the DMZ include Instant Messaging (IM) services, conferencing services, and custom applications.

When you need to locate an Exchange server in the DMZ, you have several options for protecting the server. If you have a firewall in place, you might be able to locate the firewall proxy connections to your Exchange server inside the firewall so that the server isn’t directly exposed to the Internet. This approach is common for services such as SMTP. When you don’t have a proxy firewall, you need to set up some ACLs on the router that handles traffic to and from the Internet. Typically, the configuration on your Internet perimeter will have multiple zones that lead to a multitiered architecture. In such cases, you must limit inbound traffic to your Exchange servers to the specific services you want the servers to accept (e.g., SMTP, HTTP). Likewise, you must let only specified services travel to the Internet from your Exchange servers.

If you use standard management tools to administer and manage Exchange servers in the DMZ, you might need to implement special configurations. For example, when you locate OWA servers in the DMZ, you need to open TCP ports 80 (HTTP), 443 (Single Sockets Layer—SSL—port for HTTP), 389 (Lightweight Directory Access Protocol—LDAP), and 3268 (Global Catalog—GC) because OWA uses these ports to serve clients. However, to manage the OWA server from inside the firewall, you also need to open certain remote procedure call (RPC) ports. Management tools such as Exchange System Manager (ESM) won’t work unless you configure these ports and services to pass through the firewall.

Planning the connection and deployment of Exchange services in the DMZ can seem daunting. A good place to start is your Exchange Server documentation. Also, read the following Microsoft articles for more details about configuring Exchange services with firewalls.

RDS server 2008r2 role

Tags: , ,

We are planning to do an install at an Enterprise environment soon. We plan on deploying some of the new R2 roles and features but have RDS role in mind. I found that hyper v and RDS server comes into play. Let say all of your desktop computers are Xp and cant afford to upgrade to windows 7 well there is a way around that. All you have to do is install XP’s latest service pack 3 and enable Remote Desktop connection 7. Of course the cost of upgrading and the licenses can be big but with this great feature it almost saves you the extra money as long as you have two bulky servers to install r2.

Another great feature is you can distribute your virtual desktops via Web Access which most likley will reside in your DMZ. Great administrative and security feature and very similar to Vmware’s VDI. There are multiple roles that take place in this install but just wanted to touch base on the subject.

Server 2008R2 new features

Tags:

Well for awhile now 562networks has been performing migrations. Now with R2 out and sharepoint, exchange 2010 we have some work ahead of us. R2 has allot of new features such as Active Directory and its new look. AD also has a recycle bin so now if we deleted any users or organizational units we can easily restore them. There is a ton of new features but best of all its Direct Access which caught my eye.

Direct access is a bit tricky to set up but you just need to focus on IPV6 or Teredo, NAP role or some sort of PKI infrastructure. Also it uses port 443 which is HTTPS for a secure connection. You need a server with two network cards kinda like a proxy but better. The other requirements are IPSEC and Server 2008 SP2 or all Domain Controllers on 2008 R2 functional level. Thought it was easy to setup well then again I think our expertise would show we are working with the latest of technologies.

New CCIE R&S Lab 4.0 Blueprint

Tags: ,

So I’m sitting at the CCIE R/S lab Beta, and beginning the part I was sooooo looking forward to – the new 2-hour troubleshooting section. 2 minutes into that section, I was completely bummed. It seemed too much to even attempt. 40-ish routers and switches… 10-12 trouble tickets… 2 hours… plus a new user interface. But by the end of the process, I had completely reversed my opinion – I thought it was completely reasonable. Today, I’ll describe the process and draw a few conclusions about the t’shooting section.

First, a little context is in order. The day began with a brief talk w/ the proctor, and a look around the parts of the user interface you could see before starting the timer. Then, it was time to start a timer and then answer the open-ended questions. Cisco didn’t require that the Beta candidates pass that part – they wanted the labs, process, interface, etc tested – so then it was time to click start to crank up the t’shooting part of the lab.

(I’m assuming you read my last post, which talks about the GUI; if not, go here.)

There was no physical lab book, but there was a window that you could display that lists the various t’shooting tasks that I would refer to as trouble tickets. Each task or ticket describes a problem, eg, PC1 can’t ping PC2, intervening routers should be set up to do x, y, z, make it work, that kind of thing. I can’t say how many I had, but I did get permission to say 10-12 tickets is typical. Just my opinion, but that number may change over time, particularly as they build more, some of which may take longer or shorter time.

The GUI actually worked pretty well for reading the tickets. The t’shooting tasks could be easily scrolled from the window that displays the tasks. So if I looked at my list, thought about doing numbers 3, 5, or 7 next, it was quick and easy to review each briefly. Because the tickets did not seem to be dependent on each other, it seemed a good strategy to do the easiest for me first, ignore those for which I had no current knowledge of the config, and get the tweeners in between. (Your tickets might be interdependent – they just weren’t in my case.) Regardless, the GUI made it easy to navigate to the trouble ticket I wanted to tackle next.

The shock in the first few minutes was the unveiling of the topology figure. 30-to-40 or so routers/switches interconnected, lots of redundancy. Yikes! On top of that, I came to the lab with the typical strategy for doing the config section, planning to get a good handle on the topology before doing any of the exercises. However, a 4X bigger topology than a typical config topology made that difficult. Plus, the information in the figure was a bit sparser than the typical multiple view figures for the config section. So, going in with my “understand the topology” strategy was not good, particularly in light of the time constraints.

An interesting aside: the config section continues to be performed on real gear, sitting in a rack somewhere else (I think San Jose, not sure, but it wasn’t next to us in Raleigh). But the big t’shooting topology was on a “virtual environment”, to use the approved description. So they don’t have tons of 30-to-40-device pods waiting on you. I don’t know where those instances were hosted, but the response time was better on the t’shooting labs than in the config labs.

The individual tickets were clear and fair. Plus, they were not long – after reading through them all at once, on the 2nd time through, it took maybe 10 seconds to re-read, and it was time to get into the consoles. So, there was only a little time consumed to understand each issue.

For those tickets for which I knew the topic well – those for which the list of likely potential root causes leaped to mind – I took 7-8 minutes from re-reading the ticket to finding/fixing the problem. (Yep, anal retentive Wendell timed them all.) Those for which I knew the topic pretty well, I needed 12-ish minutes on average. I had no clue on 2 of them, but they were well within the scope of the lab blueprint. I think they were all solvable for a prepared candidate, but I thought that maybe… 1 less ticket would have been appropriate, especially with the learning curve on the GUI at that point. But I think if I had mastered all the topics in those tickets, 2 hours was enough to get them done.

The biggest issue with the t’shooting section was how I approached the task. If I took it again, I would not use the usual config section approach of reading everything twice, making diagrams, understanding the topology, and then actually starting to use the CLI. I think I’d use a “read once, and then react” strategy, and be into the CLI for the first ticket within 5 minutes of starting. Think real life, the phone rings, a problem has occurred, you listen for a few minutes, and start logging in. Because most of the tickets let me zero in on 3-5 devices to solve the problem, it was more like a bunch of separate labs with separate topologies, rather than the more comprehensive config section. (I was told the fact that my tickets were focused to a small area of the topology doesn’t mean that all will be, so be warned.) Regardless, if I had to take it again, my strategy would be as follows:

Read all tickets once, enough to find the main topics, and make a checklist in your notes
Pick the easiest, and start picking them off; (Order wasn’t important in what I saw)
For each ticket:
Create a mental checklist of things to check while reading the ticket
No style points: the solution is to change the config, so “show run” is probably needed within the first 3-4 commands
Personal t’shooting style plays a role
I’d make a list of the devices I’m working on for each ticket, in case a later ticket also uses those devices; I could’ve shaved a few minutes by being more aware of where I had been before.
If you plan to spend time later reviewing/confirming, assuming you finish faster than 2 hours, take notes on what you configured on each device, on each ticket

Seminar server 2008 R2

Tags:

Server 2008 has came along way and now with R2 it has tackled some good features one surrounding VPN. Now instead of going out and buying vpn software or buying new cisco equipment you just need windows 7 and server 2008 R2 installed. Basically when you vpn into a network you are having one directional signal into the network. Now with Direct Access it creates a bi-directional signal that authenticates with active directory into your domain itself but only works with windows 7 and server 2008 r2.

Seminar on Exchange 2010 and its new features

Tags: ,

Well today our company attended Microsofts seminar in Orange, Ca. It was hard to choose which seminar to attend from Windows 7, Server 2008 R2 and Exchange 2010. We chose Exchange since we have already read up on the new features and roles for server 2008 R2.

I have to say Microsoft has came along way with Unified Messaging. The best thing I saw besides UM is Microsoft getting away from Raid and goaling torwards JBOD, which is Just a bunch of disks. To add something on Unified Messaging its all based around  voicemails. I like the fact that someone can call my land line at work and leave a voicemail up to 1 minute and have exchange transcribe it to email. There are some issues regarding if you talk fast or longer than 1 minute but it mainly works for 90 percent of the wording. They did some examples in the seminar. Another factor based in that is in your Outlook Web App you can have the emails played back in voice usually a wma but now is supporting mp3 to be more compatable with the industry.

They did talk in depth about deploying exchange 2010 in the fact that for a small-med size business you need 2 exchange servers but for a full install 4 servers for HA/Redundancy. I found that live migration can take play in migrating or installing new machines too. Great thing about live migration is it takes VSS snapshots of your machines so you can easily deploy new Exchange servers.

Another great feature I found is clustering is no longer done in the cluster manager but done in DAG in the Exchange server itself and has a heartbeat with each mounted Mail database. They suggested 3 disks for the databases and if your organization has multiple mail stores than having them split up across like a raid 5 is a good example of how it works but think of the data or parity as database stores used in JBOD . There is much more to talk about on the matter at a later time.

By attending the seminar we got a free copy of windows 7  Ultimate, Server 2008 R2 and Microsoft Forefront. During the seminar they mainly used Outlook Web App and Microsoft Communicator to do all his functions besides having his Direct Access in play. They are so proud of  Hyper V he also had 4 virtual machines set up running server 2008 r2 on his laptop. The new functions in office 2010 and exchange 2010 are going to devastate the industry. Alot of great features await also with microsoft’s new 6.5 mobile software and moble phone that integrates Microsoft office including share point functions.

Another great feature in Exchange 2010 is based around SMS texting. You can send a text to a phone number but there is a void right now between our wireless carriers and exchange. Basically the void is the latency between your cell phone carrier getting the text and how long it takes to route it to your exchange server but I’m sure Microsoft is on top of that also. There are always problems that await new software and solutions that follow.

Now serving Los Angels and Orange County area

562Networks Computer, Network repair & installation serving Long Beach, Cerritos, San Pedro, Bellflower, Seal Beach, Sunset Beach, Newport Beach, Temecula, Huntington Beach, El Segundo, Santa Ana, Buena Park, Irvine, Lake forest, Laguna Beach, Dana Point, Torrance, Carson, Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach, Orange, Mission Viejo, Laguna Hills, El Toro, Hawthorne, Lakewood, Signal hill, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Cypress, Paramount, Norwalk, Stanton, Anaheim, Westminister, Fountain Valley, Agoura Hills, Sherman Oaks, Studio City, San Fernando Valley, Los Angeles, Orange County, and Southern California surrounding areas.

Cisco Ironport

Tags: ,

Great article on the subject

http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/46036?source=NWWNLE_nlt_cisco_2009-10-09

Department of Defense to hire on 1000 new Cyber techs

Tags:

The Department of Homeland Security is looking to hire 1,000 cybersecurity professionals in the next three years according to the agency’s secretary Janet Napolitano.

The department now has the authority to recruit and hire cybersecurity professionals across DHS over the next three years in order to help fulfill the Department’s mission to protect the nation’s cyber infrastructure, systems and networks, she said.

Layer 8 Extra: 12 changes that would give US cybersecurity a much needed kick in the pants

“This new hiring authority will enable DHS to recruit the best cyber analysts, developers and engineers in the world to serve their country by leading the nation’s defenses against cyber threats,” Napolitano stated. DHS his the focal point for the security of cyberspace — including analysis, warning, information sharing, vulnerability reduction, mitigation, and recovery efforts for public and private critical infrastructure information systems.

The hiring authority, which results from a collaborative effort between DHS, the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget, lets DHS staff up to 1,000 positions over three years across all DHS agencies to fulfill critical cybersecurity roles-including cyber risk and strategic analysis; cyber incident response; vulnerability detection and assessment; intelligence and investigation; and network and systems engineering.

The need for DHS to bolster its security realm is a hot topic. A Government Accountability Office report this year said that while DHS established the National Cyber Security Division to be responsible for leading national day-today cybersecurity efforts that has not enabled DHS to become the national focal point for security as envisioned.

The GAO said the Defense Department and other organizations within the intelligence community that have significant resources and capabilities have come to dominate federal efforts. The group told the GAO there also needs to be an independent cybersecurity organization that leverages and integrates the capabilities of the private sector, civilian government, law enforcement, military, intelligence community, and the nation’s international allies to address incidents against the nation’s critical cyber systems and functions.

The cybersecurity jobs announcement comes on the same day that the FBI said fraudsters are targeting social networking sites with increased frequency and users need to take precautions, the FBI warned.

The FBI said fraudsters continue to hijack accounts on social networking sites and spread malicious software by using various techniques. One technique involves the use of spam to promote phishing sites, claiming there has been a violation of the terms of agreement or some other type of issue which needs to be resolved. Other spam entices users to download an application or view a video. Some spam appears to be sent from users’ “friends”, giving the perception of being legitimate. Once the user responds to the phishing site, downloads the application, or clicks on the video link, their computer, telephone or other digital device becomes infected, the FBI stated.

Meanwhile legislators are trying to encourage cooperation among universities and businesses to develop technology needed to carry out a strategic government effort to fight cyber attacks.

A US House subcommittee is recommending a bill that calls for a university-industry task force to coordinate joint cybersecurity research and development projects between business and academia. The Cybersecurity Research and Development Amendments Act of 2009 was approved recently by the House Committee on Science and Technology’s Research and Science Education Subcommittee.

The legislation would set up a scholarship program that pays college bills for students who study in fields related to cybersecurity. They would also get summer internships in the federal government. In return the students would agree to work as cybersecurity professionals within the federal government for a period equal to the number of years they received scholarships. If there aren’t any jobs there, they would work for state or local governments in the same capacity or teach cybersecurity courses