Testing Windows 2003 with Exchange 2003 - Advice needed

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

Hello All,

I am testing a server with Windows 2003 Server (Standard Edition) and for
the moment, I do not have a registered domain. To test everything, the
domain for the DC is just prefixed with MyDomain.local and the domain is not
registered. Email on client computers is Outlook 2003. All email accounts
are POP3. The incomming mail and outgoing mail server is the same for all
email accounts (only the username and password changes). Is it possible to
set up exchange without having a registered domain? I havn't looked into the
setup for exchange but I if someone can tell me right now that it cant be
set up without a registered domain, then i wont even try testing it at the
moment.

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks,

Neil.
8 answers Last reply
More about testing windows 2003 exchange 2003 advice needed
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

    Yes, you can absolutely setup exchange without a registered domain.
    You will not, however, be able to recieve email from the outside world.
    You can still send it, and you can send and receive mail internally.
    Let me know if that doesn't answer your question.

    Regards,
    Rick Gouin, MCSE
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

    Do you currently have a mail server? Or do you use an ISP mail server?

    Exchange can send, receive, and distribute the mail all by itself -
    without being pointed at another server - though you CAN point it at
    another server to send mail out, by creating either a Smart Host or an
    SMTP connector.

    To simplify, think of AD as the username, password, and email address
    database that Exchange draws from to distribute mail and authenticate
    users. Think of outlook as the email client that downloads the mail
    from Exchange. Nearly all of Exchanges settings are actually stored in
    the AD - right down to the location of the information stores.

    Sorry if I'm not understanding your question. Feel free to ask
    another!

    Regards,
    Rick Gouin, MCSE
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

    Thanks Rick,

    I am trying to grasp the roaming user aspect of AD. If using outlook 2003
    only, from what i can see, you would need an individual GPO install of
    office for each user to setup each email account. I know that exchange 2003
    works with AD so i am assuming that an install of office with a general .MST
    setup pointing to exchange is the way to resolve this issue. I havn't looked
    into detail but assume this is how it all works.

    Do you need a registered domain then to receive email from the outside
    world? I cant point exchange to the IP address of our mail server which will
    then distribute the mail to outlook on each clients machine (which is the
    ISP that we use). Was thinking this might be where exchange and AD came
    together to be able to distribute mail.

    I dont need exact details on each setting that needs to be configured (i can
    figure them out), I am just wondering where the advantage of using exchange
    fits into the scheme of things. As i have never used it, a general overview
    on how it works with AD and Outlook (dont know if there is any guide on the
    net?) would be handy.

    Thanks again for your response,


    Neil.

    "Rick Gouin" <rick@pragmaticutopia.com> wrote in message
    news:1110986013.647484.7070@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
    > Yes, you can absolutely setup exchange without a registered domain.
    > You will not, however, be able to recieve email from the outside world.
    > You can still send it, and you can send and receive mail internally.
    > Let me know if that doesn't answer your question.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Rick Gouin, MCSE
    >
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

    It would probably be cheaper in the long run to register a domain than
    to pay your ISP for email. But, if what you're after is to POP mail
    out of an ISP email server using Exchange, you can do so, but you have
    to use Small Business Server (SBS) or a 3rd party Exchange plugin that
    provides this functionality in the standard version of Exchange, an
    example of one is: http://www.exchangepop3.com

    SBS might not be a bad fit for you, based on your description of your
    current infrastructure. It is basically a software package that gets
    installed on a single server and includes Windows 2003 Server,
    Exchange, SQL, ISA, and some other stuff, like smart wizards and
    consoles to simplify management. Read more about it here:
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/default.mspx It is much
    cheaper to buy SBS than seperate licenses for that stuff. In practice,
    it is used for offices of fewer than 50 clients, and for our
    discussion, the key point is that it includes a POP3 connector for
    Exchange.

    Yes, you can have multiple email domains hosted on one Exchange server,
    no problem. It is actually very quick and easy to get Exchange to
    accept and deliver mail for another email domain - so no worries there.
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

    Hi Rick,

    No, at the moment, we have a peer-to-peer network which is being outgrown
    and we are looking into options on how to upgrade. At the moment, each PC
    has Outlook 2003 installed with each user having 1 account set up which is
    their own email (some may have 2, one for the individual and one is a
    general email address - like Sales@, Shipping@ etc). We use an ISP mail
    server which I am wondering if I can re-direct mail to and from with
    Exchange. I personally would change things to a server/client set up.
    Configuring emails is my only stumbling block that i have at the moment. I
    am interested as to how i can pont exchange to another server (you mention
    to send mail out - would i still not be able to receive email without having
    a registered domain?). Without having a registered domain, looks like i can
    send email but not recieve it on every senario that i have looked in to. I
    basically need a working model before anyone shells out any money on new
    equipment and registering a domain etc.

    Thanks for the confirmation, I thought this was the case, but like I said
    before, I havn't quiet figured out all the details yet at the moment. Any
    information that I have found always assumes that the domain name is
    registered (which makes sense I know). I was thinking that there may of been
    a way to store the email address, user name and password in the AD for each
    user for their POP3 account and then change the server to the IP address of
    our ISP. When I have looked into it, not that simple... :-)

    One last thing which i am wondering about is that when you have a domain and
    everything is set up properly. If the domain was MyDomain.com for example,
    would all email addresses have to be someone@mydomain.com. Reason I ask is
    because we may need 2 names and i dont think you could have another name
    someone@somewhereelse.com unless you register this domain as well and have 2
    domains with a trust relationship (but thats another problem all together
    :-))?

    Thanks for your help, it is greatly appreciated!

    Neil.


    "Rick Gouin" <rick@pragmaticutopia.com> wrote in message
    news:1111003591.798295.48260@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
    > Do you currently have a mail server? Or do you use an ISP mail server?
    >
    > Exchange can send, receive, and distribute the mail all by itself -
    > without being pointed at another server - though you CAN point it at
    > another server to send mail out, by creating either a Smart Host or an
    > SMTP connector.
    >
    > To simplify, think of AD as the username, password, and email address
    > database that Exchange draws from to distribute mail and authenticate
    > users. Think of outlook as the email client that downloads the mail
    > from Exchange. Nearly all of Exchanges settings are actually stored in
    > the AD - right down to the location of the information stores.
    >
    > Sorry if I'm not understanding your question. Feel free to ask
    > another!
    >
    > Regards,
    > Rick Gouin, MCSE
    >
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

    SBS is very easy to configure. It has all sorts of wizards that aren't
    present in the normal version of Exchange and Windows.

    Is it just one company with two names? Or is it two companies?

    If it is just one company, then you can get away with just one SBS.

    If it is two companies, then each one should have their own SBS.

    Some people will argue that you shouldn't put all your eggs in one
    basket, but that is kind of the architecture of SBS, and by using it,
    you have to acknowledge the creation of a single point of failure for
    basically your entire systems infrastructure.
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

    Hi Rick,

    Can see your latest reply in google, but it hasn't filtered through to my
    news in outlook yet.

    Anyway, I think a registered domain is the aim, but to fill the gap i have
    tested exchangepop3 and its a great simple to use program and got it to work
    no problem with exchange. The options in exchangepop3 were what i was trying
    to find in exchange which explains why i was a bit confused.

    Funny you should mention SBS 2003. I have been looking into this already. It
    would be great if SBS 2003 is as easy to configure exchange as it was with
    exchangepop3. I will have to look into it in greater details when i
    (eventually) get a trial version.

    This is the last question :-). We have 2 company names. For aguments sake
    Company1 and Company2. From what you are saying, does this mean you would
    have 3 servers? One for Company1, one for Company2 and the other is the
    exchange server? If using SBS 2003, I would probably just use 2 servers as
    SBS includes exchange anyway.

    Thanks again,

    Neil.
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

    Hi Rick,

    It is the same company with 2 names EXCEPT to the outside world it is 2
    seperate companies. Because of this, I feel each should have their own SBS
    and be independant.

    I agree with the eggs in one basket theory, and when creating a large
    business network, seperating emails from files is a must do. As for a
    network with 20 people I would say the worst case senario would be 4 hours
    restoring a back-up tape. Like you say, because of the architechture of SBS,
    it probably wont be worth the hassle of having exchange seperated.

    I think I will suggest 2 servers with 2 domains after I figure out how SBS
    works :-).

    Thanks for your input on this. It has been a GREAT help on the few question
    marks that I just couldn't figure out.

    Neil.

    "Rick Gouin" <rick@pragmaticutopia.com> wrote in message
    news:1111155348.316818.81870@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > SBS is very easy to configure. It has all sorts of wizards that aren't
    > present in the normal version of Exchange and Windows.
    >
    > Is it just one company with two names? Or is it two companies?
    >
    > If it is just one company, then you can get away with just one SBS.
    >
    > If it is two companies, then each one should have their own SBS.
    >
    > Some people will argue that you shouldn't put all your eggs in one
    > basket, but that is kind of the architecture of SBS, and by using it,
    > you have to acknowledge the creation of a single point of failure for
    > basically your entire systems infrastructure.
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Exchange 2003 Domain Windows Server 2003 Servers Windows