On July 24, 2018, the Exchange Product Group released the preview version of Exchange Server 2019. This version is the third version of modern Exchange Server. Like the previous versions, Exchange Server 2019 benefits from the product developments tested and implemented in Exchange Online. But not all features available in Exchange Online are available in the on-premises version of Exchange Server. Additionally, not all features that are announced for the new release will be available when the RTM build is released. That is something that we have learned with previous releases of the product.
ENow Software's Exchange blog built by Microsoft MVPs for IT/Sys Admins.
Outbound messages to the Internet are routed from the Exchange Online organization through your on-premises organization. With the exception of messages sent to other recipients in the same Exchange Online organization, all messages sent from recipients in the Exchange Online organization are sent through the on-premises organization.
Securing mobile devices access to an on-premises Exchange Server infrastructure without a hybrid setup is not complicated when using a single-vendor strategy. You simply implement a Mobile Device Management Solution and you are done. Enterprises doing business in the high security industry tend to follow a multi-vendor strategy to reduce the risks due to security flaws in third-party devices.
Any seasoned Exchange administrator has at one time needed to deal with a massive storm of “reply all” emails circulating the organization. It’s a chaotic situation, and not much fun to deal with, although you may enjoy telling the story to friends for years afterward.
Recently, one of my customers reached out to me stating they were having trouble delivering emails due to SPF failures. While it’s not uncommon for SPF checks to fail (you don’t want to know how many organizations struggle implementing SPF records correctly!), I was a little surprised. After all, the customer had successfully implemented SPF records for quite some time now, and rarely ran into issues with it.
This time next year we’ll (hopefully) be in the midst of project planning for the newly released Exchange Server 2019. After a scheduled late-2018 release, many organizations will be looking to learn, test, deploy, and administer the new on-premises Exchange version after returning from their holiday break. As someone who works in the Exchange Support and Consulting world, this (Jan 2017) is actually a relatively slow period for us. Exchange 2016 has been released for a couple years, its bugs and quirks mitigated, and the rush of early adopter migrations have passed; leaving only the steady flow of migration and deployment work driven by company financial scheduling rather than the Exchange product release cycle.
Why Preferred Architecture for Exchange?
Exchange Server is a very tolerant software product and allows for installation in different IT infrastructure environments. Some of the possible infrastructure environments are well suited for running Exchange Server, others are less good.
At a recent Exchange MVP panel discussion at Ignite 2017, a question came up that I’ve been asked at previous panels. The spirit of these questions were around the future of Exchange Server On-Premises in relation to Office 365. Will there be another on-premises Exchange Server version? If so, how will its features stack up against Exchange Online? What role will Exchange Administrators play in the coming years? I wanted to share my thoughts and experiences on this topic, as it appears to be one keeping many Exchange Server Administrators and Consultants up at night.
In my previous article in this series, we discussed Exchange “Alternative Architecture” options for medium-to-large businesses. We specifically covered common storage design options and which were ideal to design the best solution for a customer that has decided to remain on-premises and chosen to not follow the Preferred Architecture. To reiterate, I’m a big fan of Office 365 and the Preferred Architecture but I understand many customers will not follow either of these two routes. Therefore, if they deviate from either of these options they should at least follow the recommended guidance that can increase the uptime and better the performance of their solution.