Exchange 2007 Migration - Confusion with domain/forest functional

Hello,

I am currently migrating our Exchange 2000 server to Exchange 2007.
Our organization is a simple single-forest, single-domain network
environment. We currently have one Windows 2000 Server and two
Windows Server 2003 Sp2 Std Edition machines. We have just built a
new server with Windows Server 2003 R2 x64 edition, and we plan to
migrate Exchange to this machine. All four of these machines are
domain controllers.

I thought I understood Windows domain and forest functional levels,
but now I am finding myself confused. The book I=92m using to help with
the Exchange upgrade (Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 Unleashed) has
said in different places that:

Exchange 2007 requires a domain functional level of at least Windows
2000 native.
Exchange 2007 requires a forest functional level of at least Windows
2003.

Specifically, it says: =93To install Exchange Server 2007, the Windows
Server 2003 Active Directory domain functional level must be Windows
2000 Server Native or higher for all domains in the Active Directory
forest where Exchange will exist.=94 (p. 182) Then, later, it says,
"At a minimum, in planning a migration to Exchange 2007, the
organization needs to ensure that the server running Exchange 2007 is
running an x64-bit version of Windows 2003 SP1 or higher, and that the
forest functional level is set to Windows 2003." (p. 495)

I don=92t see how this can be for both cases=85 by definition, a forest
functional level requires all domain controllers to be at least
Windows Server 2003. If this is true, why would the book say that you
can have a Windows 2000 native domain functional level, which would
allow for Windows 2000 servers to be domain controllers? Or am I
somehow misunderstanding the difference between forests and domains in
AD?

In short, I need to know for our Exchange migration if I need to
upgrade our Windows 2000 Server to Server 2003 so that I can promote
our forest functional level to Windows 2003. Currently, we are at a
forest functional level of Windows 2000 and a domain functional level
of Windows 2000 Native.

Thanks for your help!

John
Wed Jul 16 19:03:44 CDT 2008

You will need to have at least one Windows 2003 SP1 GC in your Forest which
is also the Schema Master. So to answer your question, you will need to
upgrade your Forest level to 2003.

http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/07/30/446579.aspx

also look at

http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/Transitioning-Exchange-2000-2003-Exchange-Server-2007-Part1.html

--
John Oliver, Jr
MCSE, MCT, CCNA
Exchange MVP 2008
Microsoft Certified Partner

<beastvold@bradshawchristian.com> wrote in message
news:93f0b212-712c-4e83-8269-0af656c1234c@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Hello,

I am currently migrating our Exchange 2000 server to Exchange 2007.
Our organization is a simple single-forest, single-domain network
environment. We currently have one Windows 2000 Server and two
Windows Server 2003 Sp2 Std Edition machines. We have just built a
new server with Windows Server 2003 R2 x64 edition, and we plan to
migrate Exchange to this machine. All four of these machines are
domain controllers.

I thought I understood Windows domain and forest functional levels,
but now I am finding myself confused. The book I?m using to help with
the Exchange upgrade (Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 Unleashed) has
said in different places that:

Exchange 2007 requires a domain functional level of at least Windows
2000 native.
Exchange 2007 requires a forest functional level of at least Windows
2003.

Specifically, it says: ?To install Exchange Server 2007, the Windows
Server 2003 Active Directory domain functional level must be Windows
2000 Server Native or higher for all domains in the Active Directory
forest where Exchange will exist.? (p. 182) Then, later, it says,
"At a minimum, in planning a migration to Exchange 2007, the
organization needs to ensure that the server running Exchange 2007 is
running an x64-bit version of Windows 2003 SP1 or higher, and that the
forest functional level is set to Windows 2003." (p. 495)

I don?t see how this can be for both cases? by definition, a forest
functional level requires all domain controllers to be at least
Windows Server 2003. If this is true, why would the book say that you
can have a Windows 2000 native domain functional level, which would
allow for Windows 2000 servers to be domain controllers? Or am I
somehow misunderstanding the difference between forests and domains in
AD?

In short, I need to know for our Exchange migration if I need to
upgrade our Windows 2000 Server to Server 2003 so that I can promote
our forest functional level to Windows 2003. Currently, we are at a
forest functional level of Windows 2000 and a domain functional level
of Windows 2000 Native.

Thanks for your help!

beastvold
Thu Jul 17 11:33:30 CDT 2008

I think I must not understand something important about domain and
forest functional levels...

In the article you recommended (http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/
Transitioning-Exchange-2000-2003-Exchange-Server-2007-Part1.html), the
author says:

"Exchange 2007 requires that the Active Directory functional level is
set to Windows Server 2000 or Windows Server 2003 as shown in Figure
1.2 below."

We currently have the domain functional level set to Windows Server
2000, since we have one domain controller that is a Windows 2000
Server. I understand that if I wanted to upgrade this to a Windows
Server 2003 functional level, we would need to either decommission
that server as domain controller or we would need to upgrade it to
Windows Server 2003. However, the material I am reading is telling me
that we do not need to upgrade this server because the domain
functional level we now have will work with Exchange 2007. Correct?

Now, bringing in the forest functional level... isn't it dependent on
the same criteria as the domain: the OS's of your domain controllers?
So, when I go in to upgrade my forest functional level to Windows
Server 2003, it tells me that I cannot because I have the Windows 2000
Server domain controller. In other words, it is impossible for me to
have both a Windows 2000 domain functional level and a Windows 2003
forest functional level. If the forest functional level set at
Windows 2003 guarantees I have no DCs that are lower than that, why
would Exchange allow the domain functional level of Windows 2000
native? Why not just make both standards set at Windows 2003?

Brining it back to my own situation... Do I need to upgrade my 2000
server if I want it to remain a domain controller?
Also, to answer John Oliver, we do have a Windows 2003 GC in our
forest already.

On Jul 16, 5:03=A0pm, "John Oliver, Jr. [MVP]" <jcolive...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> You will need to have at least one Windows 2003 SP1 GC in your Forest whi=
ch
> is also the Schema Master. =A0So to answer your question, you will need t=
o
> upgrade your Forest level to 2003.
>
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/07/30/446579.aspx
>
> also look at
>
> http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/Transitioning-Exchange-2000-2003-...
>
> --
> John Oliver, Jr
> MCSE, MCT, CCNA
> Exchange MVP 2008
> Microsoft Certified Partner

John
Thu Jul 17 14:14:06 CDT 2008

Inline:

--
John Oliver, Jr
MCSE, MCT, CCNA
Exchange MVP 2008
Microsoft Certified Partner

<beastvold@bradshawchristian.com> wrote in message
news:2ffe200e-c170-435e-90c2-efc676225000@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
I think I must not understand something important about domain and
forest functional levels...

In the article you recommended (http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/
Transitioning-Exchange-2000-2003-Exchange-Server-2007-Part1.html), the
author says:

"Exchange 2007 requires that the Active Directory functional level is
set to Windows Server 2000 or Windows Server 2003 as shown in Figure
1.2 below."

We currently have the domain functional level set to Windows Server
2000, since we have one domain controller that is a Windows 2000
Server. I understand that if I wanted to upgrade this to a Windows
Server 2003 functional level, we would need to either decommission
that server as domain controller or we would need to upgrade it to
Windows Server 2003. However, the material I am reading is telling me
that we do not need to upgrade this server because the domain
functional level we now have will work with Exchange 2007. Correct?

Correct. You will need have at least one Windows 2003 SP1 GC holding Schema
Master Role. For further detail, on setup requirements
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996719(EXCHG.80).aspx

Now, bringing in the forest functional level... isn't it dependent on
the same criteria as the domain: the OS's of your domain controllers?

Not necessarily, please read this which explains in detail the scenarios.
http://www.petri.co.il/understanding_function_levels_in_windows_2003_ad.htm

So, when I go in to upgrade my forest functional level to Windows
Server 2003, it tells me that I cannot because I have the Windows 2000
Server domain controller. In other words, it is impossible for me to
have both a Windows 2000 domain functional level and a Windows 2003
forest functional level. If the forest functional level set at
Windows 2003 guarantees I have no DCs that are lower than that, why
would Exchange allow the domain functional level of Windows 2000
native? Why not just make both standards set at Windows 2003?

Simple, you could have child domains.

Brining it back to my own situation... Do I need to upgrade my 2000
server if I want it to remain a domain controller?

No, but be aware of the Setup.com command which may need to be run before
proceeding the Exchange 2007 setup.

Also, to answer John Oliver, we do have a Windows 2003 GC in our
forest already.

On Jul 16, 5:03 pm, "John Oliver, Jr. [MVP]" <jcolive...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> You will need to have at least one Windows 2003 SP1 GC in your Forest
> which
> is also the Schema Master. So to answer your question, you will need to
> upgrade your Forest level to 2003.
>
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/07/30/446579.aspx
>
> also look at
>
> http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/Transitioning-Exchange-2000-2003-...
>
> --
> John Oliver, Jr
> MCSE, MCT, CCNA
> Exchange MVP 2008
> Microsoft Certified Partner