Make a Exchange mail server

[riahc3]

I want to set up a Exchange mail server.

At my company, there is a Windows 2003 Small Business Server with AD set up. From what I see, the Exchange server was never set up.

How can I setup the Exchange server to handle my external and internal email? I have a domain already setup and bought. Right now my offsite email hosting is the one that sends/receives emails thru POP3 and SMTP from Outlook. I want to send/receive email using my internal inhouse Exchange server.

Also, our connection here is 6 Mbps download and 0.39 Mbps upload. Is this OK for this?

Thank you

 

[Dahak]

A few things that you would need, before even setting up an exchange server

1) need static ip
2) need mx record setup on domain dns
3) need Exchange SSL Cert

Then you can go and setup exchange, but the question is what Office/Outlook version are you using as I believe since 2007, and i know 2010 and 2013 have drop support for exchange 2003

*edit* also add to the fact that Exchange 2003 is no longer supported too
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=1773

 

[debian0001]

You're probably better off with Office 365.

 

[imagoon]

You're probably better off with Office 365.

This. You are to small to really have a valid use for onsite Exchange. Also the fact that you asking these basic questions means you have 6 months to a years worth of training before you would be able to get it working correctly.

SBS2003 is also close to (is?) end of life.

--edit--

It is end of life. Also SBS2003 and SBS2003R2 is Exchange 2003 which is end of support as of April 2014. Using it is not recommended nor wise.

 

[Scarpozzi]

There are huge differences between Exchange 2003 and 2007/2010/2013. After moving forward, it's tough for me to suggest deploying a 2003 server since they lack support and the move to something current would be more painful than if you started at say, 2007.

I agree with the Office 365 route if you have a small office. You can pay microsoft a yearly fee per user and have them manage everything except the users....and you'd be on the latest version of Exchange. I think the only things you can't get as easily is auditing if you ever needed to legally hold an account. Management can be via the web or through Powershell.

The newer designs have client servers, hts for mail routing, and mail stores. The 2007 and forward designs use far less bandwidth and are like 25-50+% more efficient. 2013 has started pulling HTS and the mailstores back together again if your instance would be that large. This makes it easier to deploy storage silos across multiple sites without worrying about mail routing from CAS->HTS->Mailstores....it's all CAS->Mailstore traffic and back.

You need to consider how large the environment needs to be and scale appropriately....

Finally, consider a Spam Firewall. If you host mail yourself, you'll likely want to look at one of the various Spam Firewall products available. If you go hosted, like through Office365 or other, they will help you manage Spam attacks. It is probably one of the larger headaches us Email admins deal with....whitelisting and blacklisting is at a minimum, a weekly task.

Entry-level spam firewalls are typically services, though mere RBLs are typically free. You can assume you'll pay $3000-5000 for a Spam Firewall with 2-3 years of support. That may be more than what office365 would cost you alone, not counting care and feeding of Exchange...plus backups....plus user management (additional AD attributes), calendar rights management, etc..

 

[InfiniteLurker]

Couldn't agree more with Scarpozzi and the other posts here. I would strongly recommend going the Office 365 route from what we know of your scenario. It sounds like you might not have a dedicated infrastructure team, so unless you really want to be the main support guy for all things mail server (spam, delivery issues, having the CEO is in your office or calling you on the weekend demanding to know why he's not getting emails from someone) go with Office 365.

 

[riahc3]

I commented about WS2003SBS just to know the current situation.

In the future (unknown), we have mentioned about updating to WS2012R2. I was planning to run Exchange once we update to that.

If all you guys see is bad things going fully Exchange, then I guess Ill stick to the original plan of forwarding all POP3 email to a dedicated Exchange server.

Office 365 is not really what Im intrested in. It wouldn't really change anything.

 

[imagoon]

It wouldn't really change anything.

What is the business need for this then?

Full Exchange works fine. It may not be appropriate for your environment. It doesn't sound like you have the in house expertise to get it running properly and maintain it. It also doesn't sound like you have all the parts you need. Making Exchange work is a lot more than just running the installer.

 

[InfiniteLurker]

It's not necessarily all bad things going to Exchange, it's more a matter of fully understanding and being prepared for the scope of what is involved with it.

 

[stlcardinals]

If you do plan to roll your own, you also need to get reverse DNS setup on whatever public IP address you use. Then you also get to have fun with all of the different Blacklists that decide to blacklist you for whatever reason. You would also want to get some type of spam filtering to put in place in front of the Exchange server.

 

[riahc3]

Well, I guess if it is so impossible, Ill stay with:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2388871

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I want to set up a Exchange mail server.

At my company, there is a Windows 2003 Small Business Server with AD set up. From what I see, the Exchange server was never set up.

How can I setup the Exchange server to handle my external and internal email? I have a domain already setup and bought. Right now my offsite email hosting is the one that sends/receives emails thru POP3 and SMTP from Outlook. I want to send/receive email using my internal inhouse Exchange server.

Also, our connection here is 6 Mbps download and 0.39 Mbps upload. Is this OK for this?

Thank you

No offense, but I am going to basically repeat what I said in your last thread about this SBS server -- if you have to ask these basic questions, you shouldn't even try to run Exchange on your own, let alone an ancient version like Exchange 2003. You'd be doing your business a huge disservice.

Also, you do realize that if you upgrade to 2012 and want to run Exchange, you would need to buy an Exchange license, right? Have you ever actually installed Exchange Server or do you know how much a license costs? This is not a click NEXT-->NEXT-->NEXT install and configuration. It can be very complex and subtle issues can derail the whole environment, not to mention supporting it and troubleshooting it going forward. IIRC, your company is very small -- stick with a hosted solution.

What is the business need for this then?

Full Exchange works fine. It may not be appropriate for your environment. It doesn't sound like you have the in house expertise to get it running properly and maintain it. It also doesn't sound like you have all the parts you need. Making Exchange work is a lot more than just running the installer.

This. I've run Exchange servers in various forms since Exchange 5.0 and starting around Exchange 2000, the product became much, much more complicated. And Exchange 2013? I run that too but it was not an easy installation and you need to be able to troubleshoot the entire stack (network, OS, application) to solve things. In my case, a single old DNS record left over from an old DC in one of the Active Directory DNS subdomains was the cause of all of my issues. It has worked beautifully since then, however.

 

[imagoon]

Well, I guess if it is so impossible, Ill stay with:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2388871

That is not a good solution either. It still expects you to have a working Exchange environment. Which is the entire topic of this thread. The linked method adds even more layers and complexity so if you don't have the Exchange knowledge, you are going to add even more of a mess on top of it.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

That is not a good solution either. It still expects you to have a working Exchange environment. Which is the entire topic of this thread. The linked method adds even more layers and complexity so if you don't have the Exchange knowledge, you are going to add even more of a mess on top of it.

We'll probably see future "My unsupported Exchange 2003 server won't send or receive emails. Please help" threads.

 

[KentState]

This. You are to small to really have a valid use for onsite Exchange. Also the fact that you asking these basic questions means you have 6 months to a years worth of training before you would be able to get it working correctly.

SBS2003 is also close to (is?) end of life.

--edit--

It is end of life. Also SBS2003 and SBS2003R2 is Exchange 2003 which is end of support as of April 2014. Using it is not recommended nor wise.

I know that 2003 can be a pain, but I had 2010 up and running in my home domain in half a day without any prior Exchange experience. When I say up and running, I had it sending/receiving email, OWA, ActiveSync with I believe four separate servers handling the various roles. Did this all with a dynamic IP address and port forwarding on my router.

 

[imagoon]

I know that 2003 can be a pain, but I had 2010 up and running in my home domain in half a day without any prior Exchange experience. When I say up and running, I had it sending/receiving email, OWA, ActiveSync with I believe four separate servers handling the various roles. Did this all with a dynamic IP address and port forwarding on my router.

Up in a home environment and properly working with all the security certs intact and actually not ending up on the blacklists in production environment is pretty different. Not trying to knock your skill, it is fairly simple to get the core started. Getting it to play nice on the internet and not have it eat itself takes some work and periodic maintenance.

 

[riahc3]

Well saying "its a messy solution" or "its too difficult" wont get anything done. There is a first time for everything I prefer a straight Exchange server but if its "too difficult" per say, then the "messy solution".

Its either one or the other

 

[imagoon]

I think just about everyone here has said: a) get training first b) it likely doesn't fit your needs. You keep resisting when asked what your business need is so most of us assume there isn't one.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Up in a home environment and properly working with all the security certs intact and actually not ending up on the blacklists in production environment is pretty different. Not trying to knock your skill, it is fairly simple to get the core started. Getting it to play nice on the internet and not have it eat itself takes some work and periodic maintenance.

Exactly, and at home, it isn't a mission critical application which your company depends on. If your Exchange server dies, you're on the hook to get it fixed whether the problem is network, hardware, software, etc. If you're running it on old hardware (which sounds like the OP's case), it may take a few days to get parts if the hardware dies. Good luck explaining to your CEO/President/business owner how your idea of bringing Exchange in-house was a great idea when you have to tell him/her that email could be down for a few days.

If a hosted service dies (which is far less likely), it is the vendor's responsibility to fix it. The vendor has a staff of professionals who are dedicated Exchange experts and these folks also likely have access to state of the art diagnostic tools and capabilities.

Even I don't use my Exchange 2013 server as my main email server or for anything critical precisely for the reasons mentioned above, and my stuff is less important than a business' work.

 

[riahc3]

I think just about everyone here has said: a) get training first b) it likely doesn't fit your needs. You keep resisting when asked what your business need is so most of us assume there isn't one.

Yes, I understand perfectly what everyone says It sounds great and is good advice.

Do I still want to do it? Yes.

 

[imagoon]

Yes, I understand perfectly what everyone says It sounds great and is good advice.

Do I still want to do it? Yes.

So go do it in your home lab. Don't subject your business to your learning. Learning in production is a fine way to end up unemployed.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

So go do it in your home lab. Don't subject your business to your learning. Learning in production is a fine way to end up unemployed.

This. And frankly, OP, if you deployed Exchange 2003 in my company today, I'd fire you.

 

[mvbighead]

Seriously whatever everyone else said. A six Mbps connection and less than a half Mbps up? You have a single 2003 server and you're talking about a much newer version of exchange? Sorry, but you're talking about about thousands of dollars in software costs plus hardware costs and then if your piddly circuit goes down users won't be getting email and you'll be at risk of losing your job.

If you want to learn, join technet and buy some cheap hardware. But you are setting yourself up for failure if you pursue this from a production standpoint.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

If you want to learn, join technet and buy some cheap hardware. But you are setting yourself up for failure if you pursue this from a production standpoint.

TechNet is no more.

 

[KentState]

TechNet is no more.

MS just gives out the trial versions now so it's pretty cheap to learn.