Ex2k3 has known compatibility issue with Win2k3 SP1

I've just configured a new server with Win2k3 Enterprise SP1 that I plan to
install Exchange 2003 Enterprise on.

When attempting to run Forestprep, I received the following message:

"Exchange Server 2003 has a known compatibility issue with this version of
Windows. For more info, refer to http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?Linkid=37488"

This is an IBM eserver w/ dual xeon 3.2 processors, 5GB RAM (using /3gb
userva=3030 switch), 18GB system partition, 18GB program file partition, 18gb
transaction log partition & 400 GB database partition. I can't imagine it's
due to a hardware limitation....

I'm going to remove the SP1 as my testing didn't use the SP1 and I didn't
receive this error then.

Thanks.

I'm at the same place ... but don't want to remove Win2K3 SP1. Any ideas???

Can I safely continue?

"Shannon" <Shannon@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1F9BE419-E437-43FB-8D6B-46B8DCBF95AC@microsoft.com...
> I've just configured a new server with Win2k3 Enterprise SP1 that I plan
> to
> install Exchange 2003 Enterprise on.
>
> When attempting to run Forestprep, I received the following message:
>
> "Exchange Server 2003 has a known compatibility issue with this version of
> Windows. For more info, refer to
> http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?Linkid=37488"
>
> This is an IBM eserver w/ dual xeon 3.2 processors, 5GB RAM (using /3gb
> userva=3030 switch), 18GB system partition, 18GB program file partition,
> 18gb
> transaction log partition & 400 GB database partition. I can't imagine
> it's
> due to a hardware limitation....
>
> I'm going to remove the SP1 as my testing didn't use the SP1 and I didn't
> receive this error then.
>
> Thanks.

Hi,
Maybe you can try to run the Exchange Best Practices Analyzer tool?
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

This is about a bios update for IBM servers
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c1b41242b.mspx

Best regards,
Arian van der Pijl

I'm holding off on installing the SP, as I ran all my tests on the server
without it, and had no problems. It's such a new SP that I'm sure all the
issues with it have cropped up just yet.

Perhaps you could try it out in a test environment, if you have one
available. I'm too behind on this server rollout out to start testing all
over again with this SP.

"Jan K. van Dalen" wrote:

> I'm at the same place ... but don't want to remove Win2K3 SP1. Any ideas???
>
> Can I safely continue?
>
> "Shannon" <Shannon@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1F9BE419-E437-43FB-8D6B-46B8DCBF95AC@microsoft.com...
> > I've just configured a new server with Win2k3 Enterprise SP1 that I plan
> > to
> > install Exchange 2003 Enterprise on.
> >
> > When attempting to run Forestprep, I received the following message:
> >
> > "Exchange Server 2003 has a known compatibility issue with this version of
> > Windows. For more info, refer to
> > http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?Linkid=37488"
> >
> > This is an IBM eserver w/ dual xeon 3.2 processors, 5GB RAM (using /3gb
> > userva=3030 switch), 18GB system partition, 18GB program file partition,
> > 18gb
> > transaction log partition & 400 GB database partition. I can't imagine
> > it's
> > due to a hardware limitation....
> >
> > I'm going to remove the SP1 as my testing didn't use the SP1 and I didn't
> > receive this error then.
> >
> > Thanks.
>
>
>

Yep, yet another one, I discovered it the other day whilst doing a
test environment setup.

If I install exchange on a win2k3 box with SP1 (as tested) i get the
known compatability errors and all seems to work apart from inbound
SMTP, all I did was the basic setup wizard for exchange, nothing
fancy.

I can send outbound on port 25 but wasn't receiving, kept getting a
message undeliverable reply from outlook.

Tried to telnet to the box on port 25 with no joy (not through
firewall, all local testing) it seems to disable the smtp connector
somehow, nothing in event logs.

I removed SP1 from windows 2003 and it seems to have resolved the
issue though I still seem to have a bit of a problem with
authenticating OWA externally - port 80 is open and the webserver is
delivering fine but only get half of OWA page before being kicked out
due to not being authenticated - Anybody else getting this?

Anyway, back at work now and have just replicated problem, will now
try and install SP1 for win2k3 'after' exchange install and see how I
get on.

cheers

Stuggs

[jordinyc]

OK let me guess .. you, the web surfer, are reading this now because you ran into this problem, googled "install exchange 2003" known compatibility, and came up with this page. Well if you're too lazy to click on your back button, i'll fill you in. When I looked, the second web page that came up after this forum was a Microsoft Knowledge Base article:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555285

Interestingly the above Microsoft article is dated April of 2005, JUST LIKE ALL THE POSTS ON THIS TOPIC (until now anyway).

Can you guess what the MS KB article says? Yup.

"Dude, just install it"

OK that's my version. Here's the actual text:

RESOLUTION
Although there are several issues (read info in the More Information section further down) to be aware of when dealing with Windows 2003 Server Service Pack 1 on Exchange 2003 Service Pack 1 Servers, you can simply ignore this Warning Message and click Continue.

THIS IS MICROSOFT SAYING THIS!

Don't feel too bad. I actually lost one of my biggest clients because they said that I had to do something that they themselves said I must not do under any circumstances, and refused to elaborate when I asked whether I should actually do it or not, and I picked the wrong one. Err on the side of whatever your judgment tells you makes the most sense, and go down knowing you know what the heck you're doing.

jordinyc <jordinyc.32qvnh@DoNotSpam.com> wrote:
> OK let me guess .. you, the web surfer, are reading this now because
> you ran into this problem, googled *"install exchange 2003" known
> compatibility*, and came up with this page.

Nope - I simply clicked on it in my newsreader. To whom are you replying? I
don't see the original message, and you haven't quoted it in your reply. I
suggest you a) post Exchange related stuff in the appropriate Exchange
groups, and b) use a newsreader instead of your forum to access & use these
groups.

Well if you're too lazy to
> click on your back button, i'll fill you in. When I looked, the second
> web page that came up after this forum was a Microsoft Knowledge Base
> article:
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555285
>
> Interestingly the above Microsoft article is dated April of 2005, JUST
> LIKE ALL THE POSTS ON THIS TOPIC (until now anyway).
>
> Can you guess what the MS KB article says? Yup.
>
> "Dude, just install it"
>
> OK that's my version. Here's the actual text:
>
> RESOLUTION
> Although there are several issues (read info in the More Information
> section further down) to be aware of when dealing with Windows 2003
> Server Service Pack 1 on Exchange 2003 Service Pack 1 Servers, you can
> simply ignore this Warning Message and click Continue.
>
> THIS IS MICROSOFT SAYING THIS!

No; it's a Microsoft MVP. MVPs are not Microsoft employees. Note the
"Community Solutions Content Disclaimer" link.
>
> Don't feel too bad. I actually lost one of my biggest clients because
> they said that I had to do something that they themselves said I must
> not do under any circumstances, and refused to elaborate when I asked
> whether I should actually do it or not, and I picked the wrong one.
> Err on the side of whatever your judgment tells you makes the most
> sense, and go down knowing you know what the heck you're doing.

For what it's worth, everyone ought to have long since been on E2003 SP2
anyway - and installing W2003 SP1 on my myriad Exchange boxes caused no
problems to speak of.

[jordinyc]

No good deed goes unpunished right?

Hello jordinyc,

What good deed?

Best regards

Meinolf Weber
Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no rights.
** Please do NOT email, only reply to Newsgroups
** HELP us help YOU!!! http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

> No good deed goes unpunished right?
>
> http://forums.techarena.in
>

jordinyc <jordinyc.32s9ne@DoNotSpam.com> wrote:
> No good deed goes unpunished right?

Hi - it wasn't clear to me why you posted (esp as this isn't an Exchange
server
newsgroup), and your post contained several incorrect assumptions. I
understand that you
were trying to help others, and hope you weren't offended, as that wasn't my
intention. My apologies.