1. MS Exchange at SLAC Dennis Wisinski 13 September 2001

2. Overview The way we were Convergence of needs Search for UNIX solution Summary of UNIX server tests Exchange met needs Planning and design Client program rollout Initial user reaction Staffing level

3. The way we were PMDF mail gateway UNIX mail spool  NFS volume POP/IMAP Pine, Eudora, Netscape clients Meeting Maker calendar

4. Convergence of needs Replace the existing POP/IMAP server  With a more robust one  With one allowing password encryption  With one easy to support and maintain Replacement for Eudora e-mail client  (Network share) Replacement for Meeting Maker enterprise calendar

5. Convergence diagram Decision point Pilot

6. Secure transport e-mail server Prevent clear-text passwords from appearing on the network  Kerberos or SSL encryption Use existing Unix or NT account/password Provide secure web access to mail for travelers Deal with corruption of UNIX mail spool

7. Replacement for Eudora client Eudora did not provide a robust solution for use in a distributed environment – numerous instances of mailbox corruption when saved on a shared volume. No support for SSL (at that time) Client change would be major disruption for POP/IMAP users

8. Meeting Maker replacement Meeting Maker was not scaling well:  Lock-step upgrade of client and server software  Groups are ineffective (not dynamic) No integration with email systems No integrated contact management Limited third party development

9. Search for UNIX solution Jan 98 – Sun Internet Mail Server Aug 98 – PMDF POPstore Jan 99 – Simeon Execmail Mar 99 – Mirapoint Aug 99 – PMDF MessageStore Jan 00 – Sun/Netscape Webtop

10. Summary of UNIX server tests AFS Kerberos capable servers could not be found; this left us with SSL servers Unix POP/IMAP servers required local mod for our AFS passwords; this tended to favor NT servers/clients Also: no calendar or contacts support Various features missing in each

11. Exchange server test SLD group had an Exchange server for a couple years Rutherford and DESY had deployed Exchange servers A small group within SCS started testing Exchange in Nov 99

12. Exchange server met needs Encrypted passwords (SSL) Secure web access Calendar, contacts Single instance message store Speed (large mailbox access) Standard backup methods Virus scanner Well supported product

13. Other reasons for Exchange Had site license for Exchange mailboxes and Outlook email clients Supported a variety of access methods Integrated e-mail, calendar, contacts, and tasks Third party application enhancements One of the two leading messaging systems Leverage expertise of NT Group

14. Planning and design Design of Exchange environment for SLAC influenced heavily by Tony Redmond’s “Microsoft Exchange Server 5.5 – Planning, Design, and Implementation” Additional advice culled from Exchange Discussions mailing list and associated web site. Discussions with administrators at Stanford, CERN, US Air Force

15. Planning and design (cont.) Notable deviations from accepted practice:  Mailbox quota 500 MB (vs. 20-100 MB)  Deleted items retention 30 days (vs. 3-7)  Use of SAN for message store was not widely used at that time UNIX mail spool users would not be affected

16. Client program rollout Approval of ADCC in March 00 Early deployment with about 100 users “Town Hall” meeting in early May User conversion completed in Dec 00 Expected 900 users; had 1300 after conversion (1500 now)

17. Initial user reaction General aversion to (any) change Most were satisfied after conversion Some said Outlook was the best client A few unhappy Eudora enthusiasts Unhappy Meeting Maker enthusiasts  lack of color in new calendar – remedied in Outlook 2002  lack of native UNIX client – functionality provided by Citrix client

18. Staffing levels ~1 FTE for Exchange and PMDF gateway (parts of 3 different people) Two Exchange experts and one trainee in App Group (one expert in NT Support) Only one PMDF expert and one trainee Reduced client support cost