I believe the opposite is supposed to happen. They did change the DSProxy
algorithm in Exchange 2003 sp2 so Outlook can be better served with a global
catalog server IN the same domain when possible.
I assume there are GCs in the same domains as the mailbox-enabled users?
Are the GCs in the same Active Directory Site as the Exchange servers?
>I am in a Public College setting with a forest that includes 5 child
> domains. When new Outlook 2003 profiles are created, and outlook is
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Packet captures seem to do not indicate any attempts to connect to our
> DC. Any ideas?
William Lefkovics [MVP] - 29 Mar 2006 10:56 GMT
<I'm a server guy and don't realize you could be talking about Office 2003
sp2 versus Exchange 2003 sp2>
>I believe the opposite is supposed to happen. They did change the DSProxy
>algorithm in Exchange 2003 sp2 so Outlook can be better served with a
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>> Packet captures seem to do not indicate any attempts to connect to our
>> DC. Any ideas?
tmock@rx.umaryland.edu - 29 Mar 2006 21:45 GMT
Yes, I am speaking of Exchange sp2. The new algorith should be the
following, except it isnt working as it is supposed too:
Recall that with SP2, we score the desirability of a global catalog
based several constraints:
1. A GC that is available (RPC ping) - 16 points
2. A GC that supports the Clients protocol - 8 points
3. A GC belonging to the users domain - 4 points
4. A GC within the same AD site as the Exchange Server - 2
points
5. A GC that is one of the GCs that the Exchange Server is
currently using - 1 point
Our GC is in the same domain/site. We have tried using the rpcping
utility from the resouce kit (although I cant figure out what to use as
the endpoint/uuid of the GC) to the GC and it does reply.
Lost and confused ....
William Lefkovics [MVP] - 29 Mar 2006 23:10 GMT
Is the GC it is using hardcoded somewhere?
You could try the Exchange Provider Closest GC reg entry. MS KB 319206
W
> Yes, I am speaking of Exchange sp2. The new algorith should be the
> following, except it isnt working as it is supposed too:
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> Lost and confused ....