There are lots of reasons why you should protect Microsoft Exchange. In fact, one could probably devote an entire article to simply building the case for Exchange protection; but instead, let’s simply list a few “whys” and move on to “how”.
* It could be argued that no application touches as numerous areas of a company as Exchange. From the delivery room to the administrator boardroom, almost every job function has some level of dependency on e-mail. Hence, when the e-mail server is unavailable, the entire organization is impacted.
* With regulations like Sarbanes-Oxley, in addition to those regarding monetary and healthcare organizations, the retention of e-mail is becoming an responsibility that is ethical of’s career. Other laws, such as E-SIGN, bind electronic agreements with the validity that is same written contracts.
* And finally, whilst the above two examples are “internal”, many companies today rely on email server hosting as part of doing business, externally. From distributing information between time zones, to coordinating a lunch location, e-mail is now often the most critical business communication for many companies.
So, the relevant question becomes “How can I effectively and affordably protect Exchange?” Before considering solutions, one should understand the difficulties first around protecting Microsoft Exchange.
* Exchange data is held in multiple directories with incredibly interdependent that is large. In even the most simple configurations, tens to hundreds of mailboxes can be stored in a single “information store” file.
* Exchange data are constantly in usage and stay open by the applying. Even though the files could be occasionally closed, the 24X7 use of e-mail requires them become available all of the time.
* the aforementioned two facts combined require a “backup window” and specialized, and typically expensive, software (called backup agents) to appear within the apply for traditional backup.
* And to make matters more complicated, the current versions of Microsoft Exchange (2000 and 2003) are determined by Windows active directory. This necessitates other external information to also be protected so that you can guarantee the resilience of the email system.
Collectively, it’s safe to say that Microsoft Exchange is probably one of the most applications that are difficult back up. For that reason, many IT administrators have begun evaluating various choices for Microsoft Exchange security and supply.
From a “protection” perspective, tape back-up is thought. Nonetheless, as you measures enough time and energy needed to backup windows and restore tapes, our company is forced to concede that tape back-up alone is insufficient–when you think about that tape back-up happens just nightly, which could result in up to an entire day of data loss should a failure occur. In the situation of email, a lot of that information loss is unrecoverable. And then, during times during the crisis and restoration, recovery from tape is usually measured in hours.
For some, the assumption is that the sole other available technology is synchronous storage hardware that is mirrored. Instead of attempting to “backup” or protect the Exchange data from an application perspective (which forces all of the complexities that were mentioned earlier), some IT administrators simply protect the storage. By providing a second storage solution and allowing the storage fabric to maintain synchronization, the data can be protected.
The positive aspect of protecting the storage (and not the application) is that the solution becomes application independent. By protecting the storage, we can protect every application with the functionality that is same and never limit ourselves by “agents for Exchange” or virtually any application.
The negatives of synchronous storage revolve mostly around expense (like the cost of the two storage space arrays) and the material, controllers and synchronization computer software. You can add the price of a “storage space supervisor” or other specific with specialized storage space skills. And on top of the, for just about any degree of genuine distance, one must also add the price of bandwidth–which is considerable when pressing blocks around and being determined by a fast acknowledgment due to the nature of synchronous replication.