RE: bridgehead/smtp best practices?

2003-07-10 Thread Michel Erdmann
 I also question your assertion that mailbox servers need more 
 frequent reboots. 

I've moved many of the special purpose mailboxes (for example listserver
list POP boxes, FAX Gateway) off the mailbox server. I'm in favour of
the general idea to separate them from plain mailbox servers, but not
because the mailbox server reboots more often: it's the opposite.
The (3rd party mostly) software which comes with these boxes and
connectors are mostly the problem. I can keep the mailbox server up and
running just fine and rarely reboot it.

Michel

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve B
 Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 9:37 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 
 I seem to be involved in a bit of philosophical debate and 
 want to get opinions from the field on this.
 
 Basically, I have some service mailboxes that I would 
 prefer not to run on regular mailbox servers. These 
 particular mailboxes do not hold any email, they are simply 
 needed for the cirictal operation of exchange dependant third 
 party services (like a peice of monitoring software that 
 needs its own mailbox). They pose no risk to any server and 
 do not need special attention. I feel better if they reside 
 on infrastructure servers such as bridgeheads or smtp 
 gateways since these servers tend to have less problems than 
 regular mailbox servers do (as far as is's stopping or 
 mailbox servers needing to be rebooted more often and then 
 large transaction logs replaying that contribute to a longer 
 down time for these services that rely on the mailbox).
 
 What do you guys/gals feel about this?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: bridgehead/smtp best practices?

2003-07-09 Thread Andy David
I rarely reboot mail servers.
That said, if your Exch Server is having problems, those Exch dependent
service mailboxes arent going to be doing too much anyway are they?

- Original Message - 
From: Steve B [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 12:37 PM
Subject: bridgehead/smtp best practices?


 I seem to be involved in a bit of philosophical debate and want to get
 opinions from the field on this.

 Basically, I have some service mailboxes that I would prefer not to run
 on regular mailbox servers. These particular mailboxes do not hold any
 email, they are simply needed for the cirictal operation of exchange
 dependant third party services (like a peice of monitoring software that
 needs its own mailbox). They pose no risk to any server and do not need
 special attention. I feel better if they reside on infrastructure servers
 such as bridgeheads or smtp gateways since these servers tend to have less
 problems than regular mailbox servers do (as far as is's stopping or
 mailbox servers needing to be rebooted more often and then large
 transaction logs replaying that contribute to a longer down time for these
 services that rely on the mailbox).

 What do you guys/gals feel about this?

 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_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=exchangetext_mode=lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


RE: bridgehead/smtp best practices?

2003-07-09 Thread Ed Crowley
I also question your assertion that mailbox servers need more frequent
reboots. 

Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP
Helping others with Exchange for over a twentieth of a century.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve B
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 9:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions

I seem to be involved in a bit of philosophical debate and want to get
opinions from the field on this.

Basically, I have some service mailboxes that I would prefer not to run on
regular mailbox servers. These particular mailboxes do not hold any email,
they are simply needed for the cirictal operation of exchange dependant
third party services (like a peice of monitoring software that needs its own
mailbox). They pose no risk to any server and do not need special attention.
I feel better if they reside on infrastructure servers such as bridgeheads
or smtp gateways since these servers tend to have less problems than regular
mailbox servers do (as far as is's stopping or mailbox servers needing to be
rebooted more often and then large transaction logs replaying that
contribute to a longer down time for these services that rely on the
mailbox).

What do you guys/gals feel about this?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_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=exchangetext_mode=lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]