There's a word for that attitude: paranoia. Of course, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean everybody's not out to get you.
Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? 1. Maybe my testing hasn't hit all the corner cases. 2. Perhaps it won't work in a future SP or hotfix. 3. When the president of the company or the CEO is trying to use OWA, and it's broke, I don't want to call PSS and have them say "Um, that's not supported - it won't work". I am very hesitant to put something in production with the knowledge that a Microsoft document has said "Don't do that". I was hoping that some of the people who have implemented this have found some other documentation saying it is a blessed configuration. -----Original Message----- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 5:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? If it works, why would you call PSS? Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant hp Services Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? A while back I queried the group about putting E2K front-end servers in a different domain (but same forest) than the backend servers. A couple of people responded that they could indeed be in different domains and were in fact running that way. Based on that positive feedback, I decided to try it out in test, and lo and behold it does seem to work (very limited testing so far...). Now the weird part: While perusing the Microsoft document titled "Exchange Front-end and Back-end Topology White Paper" for firewall information, I found a blurb on page 16 that specifically states that back-end servers must be in the same domain as the front-end servers. I had missed that entirely in previous reads! This paper is dated July 2000. I'm hoping that this is either wrong, or outdated (superceded by a service pack perhaps?) Does anyone have any references showing that this supported? I really hate to burn a PSS call on this... _________________________________________________________________ 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] _________________________________________________________________ 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] __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com _________________________________________________________________ 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]
