E2K to E2K7

[Davetoo]

I think Zel can probably answer this...I'm thinking about skipping 2003 and going straight on to 2007 from 2000. Is the swing method still the preferred way to go with 2007? I know I'll have to build a whole new box (was going to anyway), so that doesn't bother me.

I'm Certifiable, not cert-ified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

 

[sscherin]

I believe the swing method is the only option.
2007 will only run on the 64 bit OS and 2003 only runs on 32bit. There is no in place upgrade path.

Other things to think about in AD

The Schema master must be running Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1 (SP1) or Windows Server 2003 R2

At least 1 DC in each AD site with Exchange 2007 must be running Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1.

Also the Forest must be 2000 Native or higher.

 

[58sniper]

sscherin is right. There is no in-place upgrade path.

Time for some brand spankin' new hardware!

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

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

 

[Zelandakh]

Yup, that's the case. 64 bit hardware running at least Windows 2003 SP1 (64 bit) to take the Exchange 2007. Swing the mailboxes over, rehome the PFs if you use them and migrate the bridgehead.

I will be posting more FAQs and that is one of the higher relevance documents - I've done it for my home servers and things go quite smoothly. Emphasis on "quite"...

 

[Davetoo]

Thanks for the info. New server is a must if I go 2003 or 2007, so that's not a problem. Also, by the time I'm ready for the Exchange upgrade my domains will be 2003 R2.

Just have to decide if I want to be the first on my block with 2007!

I'm Certifiable, not cert-ified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

 

[Zelandakh]

I've seen it. You definitely want to be!!

If you've already got a hygiene server doing anti spam and anti virus you'll find it even easier. Oh but if you want to do clustering you'll need 2 boxes for the cluster and one box at least for other services.

 

[Davetoo]

I have a Barracuda 300 in front which does a great job for us (nearly 10,000,000 spam blocked since December 2). I have no need for clustering, so no issues there.

I use Trend for all my anti virus, so it'll be interesting to see if they have a version for 2007 right away. Also concerned with backups...using Veritas there so they'll have to offer up a backup solution before I'll implement 2007 as well.

I'm Certifiable, not cert-ified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

 

[Zelandakh]

Veritas? Lordy - its been Symantec for ages. You may be better off upgrading to CA or just use the native Windows backup.

 

[markdmac]

I agree with Zelandakh. Having seen the demos of 2007 and the Monad support, you will want to be the first guy with bragging rights to this one for sure.

I hope you find this post helpful.

Regards,

Mark

Check out my scripting solutions at

http://www.thespidersparlor.com/vbscript

 

[Davetoo]

Sorry...yes, it's Symantec now (10.d), just used to calling it Veritas. I got rid of CA in favor of the Veritas/Symantec product. I prefer what I'm running now over the CA line.

It will probably end up a matter of timing and the official "okey dokey" from our parent company over seas.



I'm Certifiable, not cert-ified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

 

[johnny99]

Just a comment on the Symantec (Veritas) backup stuff.

I wouldn't trade our NetBackup Enterprise for anything from CA
If we talk about Symantec (Veritas) BackupExec CA would be better.

We are using Antigen for antivirus so I expect that they will manage to have a solution in time for Exchange 2007, especiely since it is now a M$ product.

/johnny