There are many 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 possibly be argued that no application details as numerous elements of a company as Exchange. Through the shipping room to your executive boardroom, virtually every working job function has some level of dependency on e-mail. Hence, when the e-mail server is unavailable, the entire organization is affected.
* With regulations like Sarbanes-Oxley, along with those regarding economic and healthcare institutions, the retention of email has become an responsibility that is ethical of’s career. Other laws, such as E-SIGN, bind electronic agreements with the same validity as penned contracts.
* And finally, whilst the above two examples are “internal”, many companies rely on email server hosting as part of doing business, externally today. From distributing information between time zones, to coordinating a lunch location, e-mail is now often the most critical business communication for most businesses.
Therefore, the relevant question becomes “How can I effectively and affordably protect Exchange?” Before considering solutions, one should first understand the difficulties around protecting Microsoft Exchange.
* Exchange data is held in numerous directories with extremely large interdependent files. In even the most simple configurations, tens to hundreds of mailboxes can be stored in a”information that is single” file.
* Exchange data are constantly in usage and stay open by the application. Even when the files might be occasionally closed, the use that is 24X7 of requires them become available all the time.
* the aforementioned two facts combined require a “backup window” and specialized, and typically expensive, software (called backup agents) to appear inside the file for old-fashioned backup.
* And to make matters more complex, the present versions of Microsoft Exchange (2000 and 2003) are influenced by Windows directory that is active. This necessitates other external information to also be protected so that you can guarantee the resilience of one’s email system.
Collectively, its safe to state that Microsoft Exchange is perhaps very difficult applications to back up. For that reason, many IT administrators have started taking a look at different alternatives for Microsoft Exchange security and supply.
From a “protection” perspective, tape backup is thought. However, as you steps enough time and effort required 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 day that is entire of loss should a failure occur. In the full situation of e-mail, a lot of that data loss is unrecoverable. After which, during times during the restoration and crisis, recovery from tape is usually calculated in hours.
For many, the assumption is that the only other available technology is synchronous mirrored storage hardware. 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. The data can be protected by providing a second storage solution and allowing the storage fabric to maintain synchronization.
The aspect that is positive of 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 some other application.
The negatives of synchronous storage space revolve mostly around expense (such as the cost of the two storage space arrays) in addition to the textile, controllers and synchronization computer software. Then add the expense of a “storage space supervisor” or other specific with specialized storage abilities. As well as on top of the, for just about any level of genuine distance, one must also add the cost of bandwidth–which is considerable when pushing blocks around and being determined by a fast acknowledgment due to your nature of synchronous replication.