After all objectives, dependencies, and requirements
have been mapped out, the process of designing the Exchange Server 2007
environment can begin. Decisions should be made in the following key
areas:
Understanding the AD Forest
Because Exchange Server
2007 relies on the Windows Server 2003 AD for its directory, it is
therefore important to include AD in the design plans. In many
situations, an AD implementation, whether based on Windows 2000 Server
or Windows Server 2003, already exists in the organization. In these
cases, it is necessary only to plan for the inclusion of Exchange Server
into the forest.
Note
Exchange Server 2007
has several key requirements for AD. First, all domains must be in
Windows 2000 or 2003 functional levels (no NT domain controllers).
Second, it requires that the schema in an AD forest be extended for
Windows Server 2003 RTM or R2 editions, and that the schema master
domain controller be running either Windows Server 2003 SP1 or R2
edition. In addition, at least one global catalog server in each site
where Exchange will be installed must be running Windows Server 2003 SP1
or R2.
If
an AD structure is not already in place, a new AD forest must be
established. Designing the AD forest infrastructure can be complex, and
can require nearly as much thought into design as the actual Exchange
Server configuration itself. Therefore, it is important to fully
understand the concepts behind AD before beginning an Exchange 2007
design.
In short, a single
“instance” of AD consists of a single AD forest. A forest is composed of
AD trees, which are contiguous domain namespaces in the forest. Each
tree is composed of one or more domains, as illustrated in Figure 1.
Certain cases exist for using more than one AD forest in an organization:
Political limitations—
Some organizations have specific political reasons that force the
creation of multiple AD forests. For example, if a merged corporate
entity requires separate divisions to maintain completely separate
information technology (IT) infrastructures, more than one forest is
necessary.
Security concerns—
Although the AD domain serves as a de facto security boundary, the
“ultimate” security boundary is effectively the forest. In other words,
it is possible for user accounts in a domain in a forest to hack into
domains within the same forest. Although these types of vulnerabilities
are not common and are difficult to do, highly security-conscious
organizations should implement separate AD forests.
Application functionality—
A single AD forest shares a common directory schema, which is the
underlying structure of the directory and must be unique across the
entire forest. In some cases, separate branches of an organization
require that certain applications, which need extensions to the schema,
be installed. This might not be possible or might conflict with the
schema requirements of other branches. These cases might require the
creation of a separate forest.
Exchange-specific functionality (resource forest)— In
certain circumstances, it might be necessary to install Exchange Server
2007 into a separate forest, to enable Exchange to reside in a separate
schema and forest instance. An example of this type of setup is an
organization with two existing AD forests that creates a third forest
specifically for Exchange and uses cross-forest trusts to assign mailbox
permissions.
The simplest designs
often work the best. The same principle applies to AD design. The
designer should start with the assumption that a simple forest and
domain structure will work for the environment. However, when factors
such as those previously described create constraints, multiple forests
can be established to satisfy the requirements of the constraints.
Understanding the AD Domain Structure
After the AD
forest structure has been chosen, the domain structure can be laid out.
As with the forest structure, it is often wise to consider a single
domain model for the Exchange 2007 directory. In fact, if deploying
Exchange is the only consideration, this is often the best choice.
There is one major
exception to the single domain model: the placeholder domain model. The
placeholder domain model has an isolated domain serving as the root
domain in the forest. The user domain, which contains all production
user accounts, would be located in a separate domain in the forest, as
illustrated in Figure 2.
The placeholder
domain structure increases security in the forest by segregating
high-level schema-access accounts into a completely separate domain from
the regular user domain. Access to the placeholder domain can be
audited and restricted to maintain tighter control on the critical
schema. The downside to this model, however, is the fact that the
additional domain requires a separate set of domain controllers, which
increases the infrastructure
costs of the environment. In general, this makes this domain model less
desirable for smaller organizations because the trade-off between
increased cost and less security is too great. Larger organizations can
consider the increased security provided by this model, however.
Reviewing AD Infrastructure Components
Several key components
of AD must be installed within an organization to ensure proper Exchange
Server 2007 and AD functionality. In smaller environments, many of
these components can be installed on a single machine, but all need to
be located within an environment to ensure server functionality.
Outlining the Domain Name System (DNS) Impact on Exchange Server 2007 Design
In addition to being
tightly integrated with AD, Exchange Server 2007 is joined with the
Domain Name System (DNS). DNS serves as the lookup agent for Exchange
Server 2007, AD, and most new Microsoft applications and services. DNS
translates common names into computer-recognizable IP addresses. For
example, the name www.cco.com translates into the IP address of 12.155.166.151. AD and Exchange Server 2007 require that at least one DNS server be made available so that name resolution properly occurs.
Given the dependency that
both Exchange Server 2007 and AD have on DNS, it is an extremely
important design element.
Reviewing DNS Namespace Considerations for Exchange
Given Exchange
Server 2007’s dependency on DNS, a common DNS namespace must be chosen
for the AD structure to reside in. In multiple tree domain models, this
could be composed of several DNS trees, but in small organization
environments, this normally means choosing a single DNS namespace for
the AD domain.
There is a great deal
of confusion between the DNS namespace in which AD resides and the email
DNS namespace in which mail is delivered. Although they are often the
same, in many cases there are differences between the two namespaces.
For example, CompanyABC’s AD structure is composed of a single domain
named abc.internal, and the email domain to which mail is delivered is companyabc.com.
The separate namespace, in this case, was created to reduce the
security vulnerability of maintaining the same DNS namespace both
internally and externally (published to the Internet).
For simplicity, CompanyABC could have chosen companyabc.com
as its AD namespace. This choice increases the simplicity of the
environment by making the AD logon user principal name (UPN) and the
email address the same. For example, the user Pete Handley is [email protected] for logon, and [email protected]
for email. This option is the choice for many organizations because the
need for user simplicity often trumps the higher security.
Optimally Locating Global Catalog Servers
Because
all Exchange directory lookups use AD, it is vital that the essential
AD global catalog information is made available to each Exchange server
in the organization. For many small offices with a single site, this
simply means that it is important to have a full global catalog server
available in the main site.
The global catalog is an
index of the AD database that contains a partial copy of its contents.
All objects within the AD tree are referenced within the global catalog,
which enables users to search for objects located in other domains.
Every attribute of each object is not replicated to the global catalogs,
only those attributes that are commonly used in search operations, such
as first name and last name. Exchange Server 2007 uses the global
catalog for the email-based lookups of names, email addresses, and other
mail-related attributes.
Because full
global catalog replication can consume more bandwidth than standard
domain controller replication, it is important to design a site
structure to reflect the available WAN link capacity. If a sufficient
amount of capacity is available, a full global catalog server can be
deployed. If, however, capacity is limited, universal group membership
caching can be enabled to reduce the bandwidth load.
Understanding Multiple Forests Design Concepts Using Microsoft Identity Integration Server (MIIS) 2003
Microsoft
Identity Integration Server 2003 enables out-of-the-box replication of
objects between two separate AD forests. This concept becomes important
for organizations with multiple Exchange implementations that want a
common Global Address List for the company. Previous iterations of MIIS
required an in-depth knowledge of scripting to be able to synchronize
objects between two forests. MIIS 2003, on the other hand, includes
built-in scripts that can establish replication between two Exchange
Server 2007 AD forests, making integration between forests easier.
Note
The built-in scripts in
MIIS 2003 enable synchronization only between two forests that have a
full Exchange Server 2007 or Exchange Server 2003 schema. In other
words, if synchronization between an Exchange 2000 forest or an Exchange
5.5 directory is required, customized scripts must be developed.