Tag Archives: Unified Communications

Following up on my post from the other day where I linked to Scott’s step-by-step install instructions: my homeboys at Gold Systems have posted a step-by-step install guide covering installing the Exchange UM role in Exchange 2010. The big difference from a regular install is that you need the Windows Server 2008 Desktop Experience feature, because it includes the necessary audio codecs.

Scott Schnoll and his posse delivered a great session on availability technology in Exchange 2010 at INTERACT yesterday. We’ve been using this technology for a while now at 3Sharp, and it really is very, very cool.

So, the really big availability news in Exchange 2010 is the introduction of a new construct, the database availability group (DAG). The DAG is a collection of up to 16 servers, each of which can contain a replica of a mailbox database. For example, I could put MDB1, MDB2, and MDB3 on server1, MDB2 and MDB4 on server2, MDB1 and MDB3 on server 3, and so on.

Mailbox databases are now the target object for failover– instead of having an entire mailbox server failover using Windows clustering, the mailbox database itself fails over to another server within the same DAG. For example, MDB1 can move from server1 to server3, either automatically or manually.

Essentially, this is a mechanism for replicating mailbox databases between servers, something that the Exchange admin community has been asking for for years! Some highlights:

• Log shipping no longer uses SMB; instead it uses the ESE streaming API for seeding [ed: hat tip Scott Schnoll for the correction], which is considerably more efficient, and raw TCP sockets for replication. In Exchange 2007, there was one SMB session for all databases on a server. In Exchange 2010, there’s one TCP socket per database, so scalability and parallelization are greatly improved.
• This provides HA for systems that are built on top of DAS; in fact, it’s optimized for DAS. You can use dedicated storage per node; replication means that you can use JBODs without even using RAID.
• DAGs can span AD sites, subnets, and so on (although all servers in the DAG must be in the same AD domain). You can control and throttle DAG replication at the network level or using the DAG controls for log lag.
• The setup experience is completely different than SCC. To enable a DAG, you create a DAG and then add database replicas to it. You don’t have to manually create any of the failover mechanisms, install any Windows prerequisites, or any of the stuff you’d have to do with single-copy clusters (SCC).

The advent of the DAG means that some legacy features are disappearing. First, there are no storage groups in Exchange 2010– each database has its own associated set of logs. Second, SCC is dead (e.g. no longer supported). Personally, I won’t miss it.

Interesting question posed by Josh Maher: do you still need backups? We debated this hotly at the MVP Summit. Microsoft’s position is that some organizations may choose to do fewer backups once they deploy DAGs because their databases are already distributed across multiple servers in multiple sites. Of course, this distribution doesn’t protect you against logical errors in the database, which to me weakens the argument that you don’t need backups. Microsoft itself doesn’t do backups internally any longer. They don’t have business requirements to recover long-term archived mail.

Public folders: no changes, except that you can no longer use continuous replication for public folders. You can put a PF database on a server that’s in a DAG, but you can’t put the PF database itself into the DAG. Because Exchange 2007 limited you to having a single PF database per CCR-protected storage group, this isn’t actually a loss.

More to come on this topic– heaven knows there will be a lot of interesting stuff to explore as people start experimenting with DAGs in their lab. As for us, we’re about to expand our Redmond DAG by adding a server in Toledo to give us site resiliency too– should be fun!

UPDATE 15 Apr 1405 PDT: Ewan Dalton has more on the new features here.

It’s been killing me not to talk about this, but now I can! On April 15, Microsoft will officially release a public beta of Exchange 2010 (formerly code-named “Exchange 14”). There are so many improvements in the product that I can’t decide which ones to talk about first. I’ll be updating this post to link to my own blog posts, as well as to interesting posts from other Exchange folks, so you’ll see it update frequently.

Update [2233 PST 14 Apr]: the Exchange 2010 beta bits are now available for download!

Update [0549 PST 15 Apr]: the docs are up as well, and Scott Schnoll has posted a step-by-step install guide.

Man, it’s been killing me not to talk about OWA 2010. Take a look at this screenshot:

First: this shot’s taken from Safari 4.0 beta 2 on the Mac. That’s right: OWA fully supports Safari on Mac OS X (not Windows) and Firefox on the Mac and Windows, along with IE 7+ on Windows. (I can’t remember if Linux Firefox is supported or not; I think so but I might be wrong). Safari and Firefox get the full premium OWA experience, with drag-and-drop, spell checking, notifications, and the rest.

Second: check out the presence jellybean in the upper-right corner. OWA is now integrated with OCS. In this case, the screenshot shows my mailbox hosted on Exchange Labs, which features Windows Live Messenger integration. Notice that my Messenger contact list appears in the lower-left side of the navigation bar, and that next to Arlene’s name in the message pane, you can see her presence jellybean. (Take a good look at the context menu on the jellybean, too– looks a lot like the one in Outlook, doesn’t it?)

Microsoft’s video showed conversation view very briefly, but this is one of my all-time favorite Exchange features. Here’s what it looks like in OWA 2010:

So, for the conversation titled “Introduction”, I can see all the messages in the thread, with the first non-deleted message automatically highlighted. The conversation view automatically includes deleted messages, sent items, and messages that I’ve filed in other folders, so I can get a sense of the conversation’s length and spread. The view in the message list (on the left) shows how the thread branches (not much, in this case) and the location of each message; the conversation view itself on the right shows the active message, along with controls to expand other messages. Of course, I can select, move, and delete messages either individually or as an entire conversation.

Now, some of you may be scoffing right now, saying “wait a minute– gmail has had conversation views for a long time.” That’s true. OWA’s view is richer; it displays more visual information and is easier to navigate than gmail’s current implementation. Take a look at these two screenshots to see what I’m talking about. The first shows a conversation originally imported from gmail as it appears in OWA 2010; the second shows it in gmail.

Speaking of gmail, OWA 2010 can aggregate and display in your inbox mail from multiple services, too. Check out what one of the Exchange Labs options pages looks like:

There are quite a few things to look at here. First, notice the account information pane, which allows users to set their own address, phone numbers, and so on. As an Exchange admin, I can control whether users may do so or not, but letting them do so has some obvious cost and time savings benefits for the IT staff. Second, apropos of self-service, check out the “Shortcuts” area on the right side of the screen: users can quickly get access to do a number of things directly from within OWA, like setting up Direct Push or creating server-side rules. Finally, notice the “Other Accounts” section; I’ve set up a link with my gmail account so that mail sent to my gmail address shows up in my Exchange Labs inbox. (OWA 2010 also lets you select the address from which mail is sent, much as Entourage does on the Mac, so I can send messages that appear to be from my domain or from gmail).

I could go on with features. For example, the message list isn’t paged any longer– it scrolls from beginning to end, just like Entourage or Outlook, seamlessly loading messages when necessary. There are tons of other little grace notes like this, but you’ll have to wait for RTM to see some of them!

The media’s been flooded with news about various kinds of job training, including Microsoft’s Elevate America program and various state programs targeted at autoworkers, manufacturing workers, and so on. This makes sense, given that the economic mess we’re currently in means that there’s a lot of turmoil and uncertainty about jobs at all levels. Getting better training almost always makes sense, especially if that training helps increase your market value.

Greg Taylor, who runs the Microsoft Certified Master for Exchange program, just e-mailed me to say that he only has 2 open slots in the next MCM | Exchange course, starting May 4. We’ve had a lively debate about whether the MCM certification is actually valuable, in the sense that it’s worth what it costs. After seeing the back-and-forth between people like Tony Redmond (who owns H-P’s Microsoft consulting business), Gary Cooper, and Devin, the answer is clear: yes.

How is that possible? Simple. First, you get training that’s literally not available anywhere else. A couple of weeks ago, I was there when Tim McMichael was teaching CCR and SCR. In the back of the room were Scott Schnoll and Ross Smith IV. It would be difficult to conceive of a better group to teach the real-world intricacies of how CCR and SCR can be deployed.

More importantly, when H-P (or IBM, or Dell, or other large shops) go in to a customer, the customer already knows them. They’re not facing the problem of trying to convince a customer that a smaller, lesser-known shop can do a great job– and can justify its bill rates. On the other hand, for smaller consultancies, MCM | Exchange is a terrific way to immediately lock the competence flag to 1. As Microsoft continues to evangelize the program, this effect will grow. That’s why I’d jump into this rotation if I could… but I can’t. However, you, dear reader, can. It’s true that the training is about $13,000 (plus your living expenses). However, I believe strongly that for independents and smaller shops, you can sbsolutely recoup this value, and more. Check out the page, and if you’re interested in signing up, ping me directly and I’ll put you in touch with Greg.