Each office/location is in it's own Site. I have 4 Site Links (1 for all the North and South America offices - 1 for the European offices, 1 for the Asia Pac offices, and then 1 that ties the other 3 together). The Site Link bridgeheads are the servers in the 3 Hubs.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 12:32 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Routing > > > How are your AD sites configured? > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP > Freelance E-Mail Philosopher > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Miller, Robert > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 10:09 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Exchange 2000 Routing > > All, > > We have a fully meshed network (IP Cloud) connecting 65 > offices around the > world. We are currently in the process of moving from 5.5 to > 2000. We have 3 > main HUB sites (Chicago, London, Hong Kong). The hubs have > the biggest pipes > into the cloud (Chicago - 4MB, London 2MB, Hong Kong 2MB). > All other offices > range from 65K to 512K. Looking for ideas on how to setup the SMTP > connectors between the routing groups (each office, including > the hubs - are > in their own routing group. 2 ideas so far 1. 3 Hubs meshed with SMTP > connectors - each remote office with 3 SMTP connectors - 1 > connector with > the lowest cost going to Chicago, and then the other 2 > connectors with a > higher cost to London and Hong Kong (this would force all > traffic through > Chicago which has the biggest pipe and have London and Hong Kong for > redundant paths. > 2. 3 Hubs meshed with SMTP connectors - each remote office with 3 SMTP > connectors - 1 connector with the lowest cost going to its > respective hub > site (example - Dallas office to Chicago, Paris to London)... > and then 2 > connectors with a higher cost to London and Hong Kong. > > Our WAN team wants us to create a routing topology so that > any office can > send email directly to any other office - this would require over 4000 > connectors. > > Any thoughts? > > TIA, > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Web Interface: > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t ext_mode=&lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
