Exisiting Unity UM 4.04sp1 and new Exchange 2003 Integration

Unanswered Question
Jan 29th, 2008

I have an existing Unity 4.04sp1 UM installation with Failover. Unity is currently integrated with Exchange 2000. We have stood up a new Exchange 2003 environment (Same forest) and wish to re-home Unity to the new Exchange server. I have read that I need to re-run the latest permission wizard prior to running the mailstore configuration wizard. My question is this. Cisco has stated that once I integrate Unity with Exchange 2003 the existing UM mailboxes on Exchange 2000 will continue to funtion normally until they are migrated over to Exchange 2003. The only issue (cisco outlined) is that all new users have to be added to Exchange 2003. This makes sense to me, but I am questioning the Exchange 2000 UM users still functioning normally.

Any advice?

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
ranpierce Tue, 01/29/2008 - 10:14

When you run permmissions wizard and give all the mailstores that you want Unity to work with it will no matter if it is 2000 or 2003. The only thing is if there is 2003 in the environment then Unity has to be homed to the 2003 server. And if Unity is home to 2003, the all new subscribers will be created on a 2003 mailstore because that is the server that Unity is pointed to.


j.house Tue, 01/29/2008 - 11:35

Thanks for the verification. A couple other items:

Is it necessary to install the Exchange 2k3 SP1 on the Unity servers themselves if the Exchange admin tools are not installed on the Untiy servers?

Also, since this is a failover pair I do only need to run the permissions wizard once and the mailstore configuration wizard once, right?

Thanks again.

ranpierce Tue, 01/29/2008 - 11:56

Yes all servers with full blown exchange and servers with only exchange tools need to have sp1 installed and all the exact same patches.

failover --- you need to install each server seperatly (run permissions wizard (read the newer versions of pw cause you don't need to give permissions twice I think, It doesn't hurt to though) and mscw does need to be run to point the server to the partner exchange server.

Then after both servers are working then run failovervonfig.exe on the primary first. Read the docs.


any questions? anyone can pop in. I don't mind.

j.house Tue, 01/29/2008 - 12:24

Ok, one last question. My Unity servers do have Exchange tools installed....do I have to upgrade the Exchange tools to the same revision in order to get the new integration to work? Would I just not be able to run System manager from the Unity boxes? I am trying to preserve a roll-back to only Exchange 2000 if we encounter issues with the 2003 integration.

Thanks again...

ranpierce Tue, 01/29/2008 - 12:31

to my understanding you are partnering with a 2003 server and your Unity server should be 2003 same revision as the 2003 in your environment.

If I am wrong please ring in. :-)


j.house Tue, 01/29/2008 - 12:35

I am currently partnered with exchnage 2000. We are running and integration test this evening to test Unity with our New Exchange 2003 environment. I need to retain full functionality for all users that are still on Exchange 2000. I also need to be able to re-home Unity to Exchange 2000 after the test to restore the integration to where it was before the 2k3 test.

Is this possible?

ranpierce Tue, 01/29/2008 - 12:46

to my understanding, once 2003 is introduced into the environment, there is no going back. Exchange 2003 changes the properties.

Please if I am wrong let me know.


ranpierce Tue, 01/29/2008 - 12:50

I mean 2003 is a major change in the exchange environment.


j.house Tue, 01/29/2008 - 12:59

So just to confirm we are on the same page:

We have -

Exchange 2000 in production today

We also have a new Exchange 2003 environment in production today.

I just want to home the Unity servers to the new Exchange 2003 for testing and run the message store configuration wizard again to re-home back to our Exchange 2000 server.

This is not possible? Thanks again for your help....I just want to be certain of what I am getting into.

richb1971 Tue, 01/29/2008 - 13:18

Hi Ran,

Seeing as your 'on a roll' can you help me with Unity 5 and Exchange 2003: Getting verbal message that the MessageStore is offline (it isn't). Voice messages are fine but not being delivered to Exchange.

Can you help?


ranpierce Tue, 01/29/2008 - 13:55

Sorry I was in a meeting, so you are saying that 2003 is in production and Unity is working fine?

Once you introduce 2003 you are supposed to partner with the 2003 servers because it is not the same environment any longer.

I guess my question is---is Unity still working as it is supposed to with 2000?


your question about the the messagestore being offine message. (that is the UMR message.) Unity thinks that exchange is offline. Is 2000 still in the environment and is Unity 5.0 partnered with it? (probably not) I will look for a doc)

I am on Unity 4.2.1 Ginger has 5.0 I think. We both will have eft 7.0 soon :-)


again I will see if I can find something for you on this.

richb1971 Tue, 01/29/2008 - 14:03


Yeah-2003 in Production. Unity (voice messages) fine. No 2000. Sorry if I'm being vague. I'll provide anything you need to help.



richb1971 Wed, 01/30/2008 - 01:44

Hi Ran,

Bridgehead server! Had no route back to Unity! Sorted now. Thanks for all help and replies.


Ginger Dillon Tue, 01/29/2008 - 14:03

Hey Rich -

Saw your post here. I am still on 4.2(1). I just checked the bug track for Unity 5.x and there are some entries out there - I searched for Exchange. For example, although this may not specifically apply to you - http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCsb43902&from=summary

I would check with TAC on your error.

P.S. I worked with Unity 5.0 in our test lab for both Exchange 2003 and Exchange 2007 and did not experience the problem you are having.


richb1971 Tue, 01/29/2008 - 14:06

Hi Ginger,

Thanks for reply-I suspect its a permissions issue. Will read your link




This Discussion