Moving a Mail Server to new Premises

[nutcase]

The only counter for a business of that size to not be using Office 365 or an equivalent is generally that they don't want to pay for it, but usually that is because of a failure to compare like-for-like - Exchange 2007 running on an 8 year old HP Proliant on the floor in a cupboard with a half-dead storage array connected to a non-redundant network and Internet connection probably is cheaper than Office 365 licenses.

This is kind of us - except we're more up to date with exchange 2010 and the server is only 6 years old. The internet connection is however half decent with a leased line with FTTC backup.

We recently changed ISP and our new external IPs were already on a blacklist (something to check as soon as you know your IPs not as soon as it all goes wrong) and all in it took 2 WEEKS to get them removed from all lists. There are more than MXtoolbox check for example that some Government agencies use and good luck asking them to "Just white list us"...

Having said that, it's still more cost effective for us to remain on premises even though we will soon be having to shell out for a new exchange licence and CALs and new Office licences to replace Office 2010 as well (soon = within 3 years). We get our money's worth lol

 

[stewski]

This is kind of us - except we're more up to date with exchange 2010 and the server is only 6 years old. The internet connection is however half decent with a leased line with FTTC backup.

We recently changed ISP and our new external IPs were already on a blacklist (something to check as soon as you know your IPs not as soon as it all goes wrong) and all in it took 2 WEEKS to get them removed from all lists. There are more than MXtoolbox check for example that some Government agencies use and good luck asking them to "Just white list us"...

Having said that, it's still more cost effective for us to remain on premises even though we will soon be having to shell out for a new exchange licence and CALs and new Office licences to replace Office 2010 as well (soon = within 3 years). We get our money's worth lol

Interesting, were the tainted IP's associated with a broadband service or your leased line? In any case these are a little anecdotal and contrary to my experience. If the claim is made that cloud email is superior to on prem due to poor reputation of external broadband IP's I just wanted to know what evidence that claim is based on, Ive not even seen MS and others claiming such.

 

[stewski]

If you run a tight ship in your place of work then good for you, but the majority of people that I have the "we host our own email" discussion with have absolutely nothing in place to prevent the cleaner coming in one evening and plugging whatever they wanted into an open network outlet that has nothing firewalling it off from their mail server containing confidential client data.

If you're a small business and you've built up a server room with biometrics, you audit all the access, and have gone through various compliance processes for your SBS box then you're probably running the show at Wayne Manor, in which case congratulations.

Regardless, this has strayed way off topic now.

If we're just being silly, do you think yahoo and mailchip aus were using biometrics in wayne manor?

 

[nutcase]

Interesting, were the tainted IP's associated with a broadband service or your leased line? In any case these are a little anecdotal and contrary to my experience. If the claim is made that cloud email is superior to on prem due to poor reputation of external broadband IP's I just wanted to know what evidence that claim is based on, Ive not even seen MS and others claiming such.

We were issued with a block of 6 usable static IPs. I don't have screenshots but on more than one blacklist I found them on, had them listed as dynamic, and also located in Germany as opposed to the UK so I presume they perhaps were bought by the ISP recently.

 

[Caged]

If we're just being silly, do you think yahoo and mailchip aus were using biometrics in wayne manor?

I am not sure where you're going with this to be honest - you obviously have your opinion and are sticking by it. I never said things are more secure simply because they are in the cloud, I said that large cloud providers will have a better security infrastructure (infrastructure meaning physical access, logging, auditing, dedicated security staff, change control processes, analysis of firewall logs, disclosure of breaches etc.) than is possible at the SMB level simply because it doesn't make financial sense to do it when you have a few servers in a rack in a corner of the office.

If you have systems in place that would pass an audit for one of the many regulatory frameworks then you likely are in the minority amongst users of SBS.

 

[stewski]

I am not sure where you're going with this to be honest - you obviously have your opinion and are sticking by it. I never said things are more secure simply because they are in the cloud, I said that large cloud providers will have a better security infrastructure (infrastructure meaning physical access, logging, auditing, dedicated security staff, change control processes, analysis of firewall logs, disclosure of breaches etc.) than is possible at the SMB level simply because it doesn't make financial sense to do it when you have a few servers in a rack in a corner of the office.

If you have systems in place that would pass an audit for one of the many regulatory frameworks then you likely are in the minority amongst users of SBS.

Sure if your point is purely that you can "feel" more secure and tick some boxes by outsourcing fair enough,. All I'm questioning is the evidence that for the extra money you actually get benefits like better reputation/fewer bounces etc and on regulatory requirements, which email regulaton applicable to small business in the UK are you suggesting are covered better by 365?

 

[Deleted member 77746]

It's probably more cost effective to have it hosted externally and not on premises. How many users are we talking about?

Your time is more valuable than sitting fixing problems like this.

 

[Deleted member 138126]

If as it appears you are arguing against on prem email there are a number of arguments against it.
Loss of internet = loss of internal service.
Ownership and retention of data
Security (and yes the argument that the bigger firms are better is easy to make but, yahoo, mailchip and plenty of other examples are contrary to that.)
Show me it's actually cheaper than a virtualised SBS 2011 for example, running on a box we have to have on prem for SQL anyway.

Did you just argue *for* deploying an operating system that ended mainstream support two years ago, and goes end of life in 3?

 

[Liquidfox]

Did you just argue *for* deploying an operating system that ended mainstream support two years ago, and goes end of life in 3?

That you haven't been able to purchase for around the same amount of time too?

 

[stewski]

Did you just argue *for* deploying an operating system that ended mainstream support two years ago, and goes end of life in 3?

Personally no fan of SBS 2011 (it was here when I joined) so I'm unsure where you got "deploying" from.
But some perspective:
It is supported through to 2020, the provider who decided to no longer produce the product are also a cloud email service provider, hmmmm odd that...

 

[Deleted member 138126]

Anybody that is recommending on-prem email in 2017 to an organisation under several hundred users has officially been left well and truly behind (and there are plenty of ENORMOUS companies that have their email in the cloud). I'm not trying to sell anything, I am just stating a FACT.

Your argument that Microsoft launched Office 365 while simultaneously dropping support for Windows 2008 R2 as some sort of conspiracy is very odd. Microsoft currently sell and support Windows 2012 R2 and Windows 2016 -- you need to be thinking about upgrading, not trying to stay behind.

I'm not saying you have to rip everything out, but to be vehemently arguing against one of the best developments in IT (email in the cloud) in recent years, and to be comparing and contrasting it to SBS 2011 is... difficult to put politely.

Microsoft's security is VASTLY superior to whatever security you think you have implemented. That is a simple, verifiable FACT.

Broadband IPs generally speaking belong to vast blocks of blacklisted IPs. That is a simple, verifiable FACT.

Email spam filters check sender source IPs against blacklists. That is a simple, verifiable FACT.

You stated a couple of times that if you already need the hardware for something else, then you might as well run the mail software on it, too. The cost of hardware is TINY compared to the ongoing costs (technical, human, licensing) of running your own mail server. Office 365 costs as little as £3.10 per user per month. If a business can't afford that, then some pretty serious questions need to be asked. These are all simple, verifiable FACTS.

I hope this answers some of your questions.

 

[nutcase]

We have 225 users or thereabouts.

Exchange online Plan 1 = £30 per annum so £6750 per annum.

From what I can see, we migrated to Exchange 2010 in 2011 so lets assume we got 6 years out of it - so we have a "budget" of £40,500 not including price increases - and we could get another 3 years out of it. No reason to expect not to get the same if we upgrade to Exchange 2016.

Exchange server std - £565
Server 2016 - £704
225 exchange user cals - £15,750
Suitable hardware and storage - £7k being generours (can also be used for other purposes)
3 further years 24/7 support for hardware - £4k
Tapes for existing backup library ~£200

Server user CALs, Office etc. needed either way so out of equation.

So roughly 60% of the cost to use on-premises. Gives enough left over for a second server for a bit of redundancy which is something we've never had before. We could possibly negotiate a small decrease in our IT support company costs if they don't have to look after exchange any more so, but still a lot cheaper for us to remain on-premises. And actually even more worthwhile as we own about 75 Exchange 2016 CALs anyway from where we increased our staff numbers recently.

I have no doubt the above can be torn apart, but it's how we operate and have done successfully for many years. I call it the "getting your money's worth" method.

 

[Caged]

How much does the site you failover to when yours goes dark cost you?

 

[nutcase]

At present - what failover? (Don't tell Murphy lol)

When I do get to buy a second licence, nothing, we already have an office there.

 

[stewski]

Anybody that is recommending on-prem email in 2017 to an organisation under several hundred users has officially been left well and truly behind (and there are plenty of ENORMOUS companies that have their email in the cloud). I'm not trying to sell anything, I am just stating a FACT.

Your argument that Microsoft launched Office 365 while simultaneously dropping support for Windows 2008 R2 as some sort of conspiracy is very odd. Microsoft currently sell and support Windows 2012 R2 and Windows 2016 -- you need to be thinking about upgrading, not trying to stay behind.

I'm not saying you have to rip everything out, but to be vehemently arguing against one of the best developments in IT (email in the cloud) in recent years, and to be comparing and contrasting it to SBS 2011 is... difficult to put politely.

Microsoft's security is VASTLY superior to whatever security you think you have implemented. That is a simple, verifiable FACT.

Broadband IPs generally speaking belong to vast blocks of blacklisted IPs. That is a simple, verifiable FACT.

Email spam filters check sender source IPs against blacklists. That is a simple, verifiable FACT.

You stated a couple of times that if you already need the hardware for something else, then you might as well run the mail software on it, too. The cost of hardware is TINY compared to the ongoing costs (technical, human, licensing) of running your own mail server. Office 365 costs as little as £3.10 per user per month. If a business can't afford that, then some pretty serious questions need to be asked. These are all simple, verifiable FACTS.

I hope this answers some of your questions.

It's all well and good stating the above and echoes other peoples thoughts who I respect, what I asked for were sources of evidence of the above.

 

[Logsi]

It's probably more cost effective to have it hosted externally and not on premises. How many users are we talking about?

Your time is more valuable than sitting fixing problems like this.

We have around 40-50 users.

I've had enough of the on premises mail server now. It's all migrating to Office 365 as I type. We're paying for the subs anyway for office so may as well utilise the exchange. For anyone that doesn't need office the Plan 1 exchange is a good option also. The Kerio licenses cost us around £800 a year so it's a no brainer to cut that cost and migrate to something we're already paying for.

Trouble free email ahead I hope as, while I do like some of the on premises features, I can't be doing with the hassle of it.

Switching DNS this weekend.

 

[the-evaluator]

Trouble free email ahead I hope as, while I do like some of the on premises features, I can't be doing with the hassle of it.

There's no such thing as trouble free mail. That also applies to people using Office 365. It breaks occasionally has the odd brain fart where is doesn't work properly but generally speaking is is very reliable.

You'll still have hassle to deal with but now you'll be limited in what information you can give to the business purely because Microsoft don't really tell you much,

Support is generally excellent, I had an odd issue where I changed the primary SMTP address for a user but emails were still going out with the old address. I opened a support case and had a calal from Microsoft a couple of hours later. It ended up being an issue that needed to be passed to engineering but it was sorted within 24 hours.

 

[LeeUK]

Company I work for have recently switched from Exchange to GSuite GMail and hosted docs etc. 132K employees.

 

[Caged]

That's an interesting choice. How much user training have they embarked on?

 

[LeeUK]

Not much, they sent someone from each location to a workshop on how to use it so they could come back and show everyone else. Not like I needed any help, been using GMail since 2004.