The routing topology and components of Exchange 2010 differ significantly from those of Exchange 2003 but generally correlate in the following ways:
-
The Active Directory site in Exchange 2010 correlates to routing groups in Exchange 2003.
-
IP site links in Exchange 2010 correlate to the concept of routing group connectors in Exchange 2003.
-
The functionality of the Hub Transport server role in Exchange 2010 correlates to the functionality of a dedicated bridgehead server in Exchange 2003.
However, each Exchange version differs in the method used to determine routing paths. For more information about the routing differences, see Upgrade from Exchange 2003 Transport.
A message relayed from a Hub Transport server to an Exchange 2003 server for delivery to a recipient mailbox located on an Exchange 2003 server must be relayed across a routing group connector. All Exchange 2010 servers are associated with a single routing group named Exchange Routing Group (DWBGZMFD01QNBJR) for the purposes of routing to earlier versions of Exchange when Exchange 2010 coexists in the same organization with Exchange 2003. Placement of Exchange 2010 and earlier versions of Exchange in the same routing group isn't supported. Therefore, at least one routing group connector will always separate Exchange 2010 servers from Exchange 2003 servers.
When an Exchange 2010 Hub Transport server determines the least-cost routing path to an Exchange 2003 server, the routing component of the Microsoft Exchange Transport service uses the following algorithm to select the least-cost routing path to a computer running Exchange 2003:
-
Examine all possible routing paths across routing group connectors and select the routing path that has the least total cost.
-
If more than one routing path has the same cost, examine all possible routing paths across IP site links to reach the first routing group connector and select the routing path that has the lowest total IP site link cost.
-
If more than one routing path has the same routing group cost and has the same IP site link cost, select the routing path that includes the least number of hops.
-
If more than one routing path has the same routing group cost, the same IP site link cost, and the same number of hops, select the routing path where the name of the last Active Directory site before the destination site has the lowest alphanumeric value.
The following figure shows an example of a routing topology where Exchange 2010 and Exchange 2003 coexist.
Routing topology where Exchange 2010 and Exchange 2003 coexist.gif)
In this example, a message is being routed from a Hub Transport server in Site A to an Exchange 2003 server located in routing group 2. Two possible routing paths exist to reach routing group 2:
-
Option 1: From routing group connector A3 at a cost of 10, to routing group connector 2-3 at a cost of 20. This routing path has a total cost of 30.
-
Option 2: From routing group connector C1 at a cost of 10, to routing group connector 1-2 at a cost of 10. This routing path has a total cost of 20.
In this example, Option 2 has a lower total routing group connector cost, and the message is routed from the Hub Transport server in Site A, to a Hub Transport server in Site C where it's queued for delivery by using routing group connector C1.
The previous example shows how the routing decisions may not result in optimal routing due to the assigned costs on the routing group connectors. To maintain optimal routing, you may need to modify the routing group connector costs you have in your organization. The following figure shows the same topology, but with the cost of routing group connector 2-3 changed to 10.
Routing topology where Exchange 2010 and Exchange 2003 coexist with a revised routing group connector cost.gif)
Again, two possible routing paths are available to reach routing group 2:
-
Option 1: From routing group connector A3 at a cost of 10, to routing group connector 2-3 at a cost of 10. This routing path has a total cost of 20.
-
Option 2: From routing group connector C1 at a cost of 10, to routing group connector 1-2 at a cost of 10. This routing path has a total cost of 20.
In this scenario, both options have the same total routing group connector cost. Routing next evaluates the cost of the IP site links that must be crossed to reach the first routing group connector. From Site A, the IP site link cost to reach routing group connector A3 is zero, and the cost to reach routing group connector C1 is 20. Therefore, the routing path described in Option 1 is selected.
Return to top