I've run Outlook over some pretty think links. Available bandwidth and user types are the important factors. Without statistics on current bandwidth utilization and availability, your boss's idea is like naked beer slides. Fun in theory, potentially painful in practice.[1]
[1] No comment. [2] [2] Really. Chris -- Chris Scharff Senior Sales Engineer MessageOne If you can't measure, you can't manage! > -----Original Message----- > From: Miller, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:58 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Consolidating Exchange Servers > > > All, > > Looking for some feedback / possible horror stories on the > topic of server consolidation. We are an Exchange 5.5 shop - > 80 servers in 55 Sites. Every Site has a local mailbox > server. The Boss is wanting to consolidate all the Exchange > servers into 3, 1 in each region (North America, Asia, > Europe). It would work out to be about 2500 mailboxes per > server. The network is an ATM backbone (IP cloud) - with > circuit speeds ranging from 64K to 512K. I am not concerned > about the load of the server, as I can definitely build a > beefy cluster to handle the amount of users - I am more > concerned about the latency. I dont see running Outlook > locally as an option, nor do I even see running a thin client > as an option, seeing the circuit speeds we have... > > Any thoughts / suggestions? > > TIA, > > BM > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
