Your opinion on deployed Cached Exchange Mode Outlook...

[john.demerjian]

Hi

If you've got a few remote sites with reasonable connectivity (Like a
T1) and say there are 40 to 50 users at each, is it too risky to deploy
cached mode? What I see as the problem is file attachements (and
nothing else). If you've got an Exchange server on the remote site and
you send a 2MB attachment, you've got one 2MB attachment travelling
over the T1 to the remote site. But if you have no Exchange server and
you send that same attachement (even with cached mode enabled) you are
in effect sending 2MB times the number of users in the remote site (say
50) = 100MB. Am I correct? Opinions on cached mode with attachments?
How have people deployed this? Have you limited the size of file
attachments to 1 MB or something to make cached mode more realistic?

 

[Roady [MVP]]

This is not so much a question about CM but more about the amount of
Exchange servers you need to deploy. The attachment still needs to travel
to the client. CM makes sure that this only has to happen once per client
even when they acres it again. when this reduces your web traffic to a
level that bandwidth is sufficient to remove an Exchange server you should
go for it (in most cases). So; measure your traffic.

--
Robert Sparnaaij [MVP-Outlook]
www.howto-outlook.com

Tips of the month:
-FREE tool; QuickMail. Create new Outlook items anywhere from within Windows
-Properly back-up and restore your Outlook data