Hi,

For a HA implementation between 2 sites I am suggesting to implement 2 CAS Servers and 2 Mailbox Servers in each site, but the customer is asking me for a cheaper solution.

So, Is posible to implement an HA solution putting 1 CAS and 1 Mailbox Server in each site? what are the pro and cons?

thanks in ad

Why split the roles?

It hasn't been best practise to split the roles for some time.

Depending on the number of users, you could get away with just two servers. The most common implementation I do below 500 users is three servers, two in the main office and one off site, with a load balancer (Kemp or JetNexus).

I haven't split the roles out for years. The only reason people do that I have seen is to use WNLB, a solution which is not recommended by the Exchange product team.

Simon.

The first and foremost question to ask is whether the network between the two sites can support all clients in one site connecting to the server in the other site with reasonable resp

Why split the roles?

It hasn't been best practise to split the roles for some time.

Depending on the number of users, you could get away with just two servers. The most common implementation I do below 500 users is three servers, two in the main office and one off site, with a load balancer (Kemp or JetNexus).

I haven't split the roles out for years. The only reason people do that I have seen is to use WNLB, a solution which is not recommended by the Exchange product team.

Why split the roles?

It hasn't been best practise to split the roles for some time.

Depending on the number of users, you could get away with just two servers. The most common implementation I do below 500 users is three servers, two in the main office and one off site, with a load balancer (Kemp or JetNexus).

I haven't split the roles out for years. The only reason people do that I have seen is to use WNLB, a solution which is not recommended by the Exchange product team.

And WNLB won't work acr