Released: Exchange Server 2013 RTM Cumulative Update 1

Published Apr 02 2013 09:00 AM 99.2K Views

We know a lot of you have been waiting for this, and so it is with great excitement that we announce that Exchange Server 2013 RTM Cumulative Update 1 (CU1) has been released to the web and is available for immediate download! This is the first release using the new servicing model for Exchange Server 2013. In addition to this article, the Exchange 2013 RTM CU1 release notes are also available.

Note: Article links that may not have been available at the time of this post's publishing are now available. Updated Exchange 2013 documentation, including Release Notes, is now available on TechNet.

CU1 is the minimum version of Exchange 2013 required for on-premises coexistence with supported legacy Exchange Server versions. The final build number for CU1 is 15.0.620.29. For more information on coexistence, check out the Planning and Deployment documentation, and this Ignite webcast covering deployment of and coexistence with Exchange Server 2013.

Upgrading/Deploying Cumulative Update 1

Unlike previous versions, cumulative updates do not use the rollup infrastructure; cumulative updates are actually full builds of the product, meaning that when you want to deploy a new server, you simply use the latest cumulative update build available and do not necessarily need to apply additional Exchange Server updates.

Active Directory Preparation

Prior to upgrading or deploying the new build onto a server, you will need to update Active Directory. For those of you with a diverse Active Directory permissions model you will want to perform the following steps:

  1. Exchange 2013 RTM CU1 includes schema changes. Therefore, you will need to execute setup.exe /PrepareSchema /IAcceptExchangeServerLicenseTerms.
  2. Exchange 2013 RTM CU1 includes enterprise Active Directory changes (e.g., RBAC roles have been updated to support new cmdlets and/or properties). Therefore, you will need to execute setup.exe /PrepareAD /IAcceptExchangeServerLicenseTerms.
  3. Exchange 2013 RTM CU1 includes changes to the permissions within the domain partition (e.g., Exchange Servers have been granted the ability to modify msExchActiveSyncDevices class on inetOrgPerson objects). Therefore, you will need to execute setup.exe /PrepareDomain /IAcceptExchangeServerLicenseTerms in each domain containing Exchange servers or mailboxes.
Note: If your environment contains only Exchange 2007, and you upgrade to Exchange 2013, keep in mind you cannot deploy Exchange 2010 in that environment at a later time. If you foresee a need to deploy Exchange 2010 servers into your environment, deploy an Exchange 2010 multi-role server (with all four servers roles) prior to executing Exchange 2013 setup.exe /PrepareAD. As long as you retain at least one role of each legacy server, you will continue to be able to install additional servers of that version into your coexistence environment. Once you remove the last server role of a legacy version, you will no longer be able to reintroduce that version into the environment.

Coexistence Pre-Deployment Step: OAB Verification

As mentioned in the Exchange Server 2013 CU1 release notes, when you deploy the first Exchange 2013 Mailbox server in an existing Exchange organization, a new default Offline Address Book is created.

Figure 1: The new OAB as shown in an Exchange Server 2010 SP3 & 2013 CU1 environment

All existing clients that rely on an OAB will see this new default OAB the next time they look for an OAB update. This will cause these clients to perform a full OAB download. To prevent this from happening, you can configure your existing mailbox databases to explicitly point to the current default OAB prior to introducing the first Exchange 2013 server. You can do this one of two ways:

  1. Within the Exchange Management Console (EMC), navigate to Organization Configuration –> Mailbox –> Database Management –> Mailbox Database Properties –> Client Settings.

    Figure 2: Modifying the default Offline Address Book at the database level in the EMC

  2. Alternatively, if you have many mailbox databases to update, the following Exchange Management Shell command can be used to view all mailbox databases without a default OAB explicitly set on them. If you have both Exchange 2007 and Exchange 2010 deployed on-premises then you will have to run the following commands using the respective Exchange Management Shell version as the Get/Set-MailboxDatabase commands are version specific.

    Get-MailboxDatabase | Where {$_.OfflineAddressBook -eq $Null} | FT Name,OfflineAddressBook -AutoSize

    If no values are returned then you are already prepared. However, if you need to configure some databases, then this next command will find all mailbox databases in an Exchange 2007 or Exchange 2010 environment with no default OAB defined at the database level, and it will set it to the current default OAB in the org.

    Get-MailboxDatabase | Where {$_.OfflineAddressBook -eq $Null} | Set-MailboxDatabase -OfflineAddressBook (Get-OfflineAddressBook | Where {$_.IsDefault -eq $True})

    To confirm all Exchange 2007/2010 mailbox databases now have a defined default OAB, re-run the first command. This time it should return no entries.

Server Deployment

Once the preparatory steps are completed, you can then deploy CU1 and start your coexistence journey. If this is your first Exchange 2013 server deployment, you will need to deploy both an Exchange 2013 Client Access Server and an Exchange 2013 Mailbox Server into the organization. As explained in Exchange 2013 Client Access Server Role, CAS 2013 is simply an authentication and proxy/redirection server; all data processing (including the execution of remote PowerShell cmdlets) occurs on the Mailbox server. You can either deploy a multi-role server or each role separately (just remember if you deploy them separately, you cannot manage the Exchange 2013 environment until you install both roles).

If you already deployed Exchange 2013 RTM code and want to upgrade to CU1, you will run setup.exe /m:upgrade /IAcceptExchangeServerLicenseTerms from a command line after completing the Active Directory preparatory steps or run through the GUI installer. Deploying future cumulative updates will operate in the same manner.

Note: Unlike previous versions, in Exchange 2013, you cannot uninstall a single role from a multi-role server. For example, if you deploy the CAS and MBX roles on a single machine, you cannot later execute setup to remove the CAS role; you can only uninstall all server roles.

Mailbox Sizes in Exchange Server 2013

As you start migrating your mailboxes to Exchange 2013, one thing you may notice is that your mailboxes appear to be larger post move.

As you can imagine, with hosting millions of mailboxes in Office 365, accurate storage reporting is essential, just like in your on-premises deployments. One of the learnings that we accrued into the on-premises product is ensuring that the mailbox usage statistics are more closely aligned with the capacity usage within the Mailbox database. The impact of reporting space more accurately means that mailbox quota limits may need to be adjusted prior to the mailbox move so that users are not locked out of their mailbox during the migration process.

Our improved space calculations may result in a mailbox’s reported size increasing on average of 30% when the mailbox is moved from a legacy version of Exchange to Exchange 2013. For example, if a mailbox is reported as 10GB in size on Exchange Server 2010, then when the mailbox is moved to Exchange 2013, it may be reported as 13GB. This does not mean that migrating to Exchange 2013 will increase your capacity footprint by 30% per mailbox; it only means that the statistics are including more data about the space the mailbox consumes. 30% is an average value, based on what we have experienced in Exchange Online. Customers with pilot mailboxes should determine what their own average increase value may be as some environments may see higher or lower values depending on the most prevalent type of email within their mailboxes. Again, this does not mean there will be an increase in the size of the database file on disk; only the attribution of space to each mailbox will increase.

New Functionality Included in Cumulative Update 1

Exchange 2013 RTM CU1 includes a number of bug fixes and enhancements over the RTM release of Exchange 2013. Some of the more notable enhancements are identified below.

Address Book Policies

As discussed recently, an Address Book Policy Routing Agent has been included in Exchange 2013 RTM CU1. For all the juicy details, see Address Book Policies, Jamba Jokes and Secret Agents.

Groups can once again manage groups!

In Exchange 2010 you could not use a group as an owner for another group for membership management. Instead you had to deploy explicit permissions on groups or use a script as a workaround.

Since Exchange 2010’s release both Microsoft Support and the Exchange Product Group received resounding feedback on the need for this capability. The good news is that with Exchange 2013 RTM CU1 groups can once again be owners of groups for membership management.

Public Folder Favorites Access through Outlook Web App

In Exchange Server 2013 RTM there was no way to access Public Folder content through Outlook Web App. In CU1 you will now have access to Public Folders you have added as favorites via your favorites menu either in Outlook or Outlook Web App. However, this access is limited to Public Folders stored on Exchange Server 2013.

Figure 3: Adding a Public Folder as a favorite in Outlook Web App in Exchange Server 2013 RTM CU1

Remember, you cannot start creating Public Folders on Exchange Server 2013 until all users have been migrated to Exchange Server 2013. For how to migrate from legacy Public Folders to Exchange Server 2013 Public Folders, see Migrate Public Folders to Exchange 2013 From Previous Versions.

Exchange Admin Center Enhancements

The Exchange Admin Center (EAC) has been enhanced and now includes Unified Messaging management, improvements in the migration UI allowing more migration options reducing the gap between PowerShell and the UI, and general overall improvements in the user experience for consistency and simplification based on customer feedback.

High Availability and Monitoring Enhancements

There are have been several enhancements in the high availability and Managed Availability space. In particular:

  • The Best Copy Selection algorithm now honors MaximumActiveDatabases.
  • Auto-reseed now supports disks that have Bitlocker encryption.
  • Many probes, monitors, and responders have been updated and improved over the RTM release.
  • Get-HealthReport cmdlet has been streamlined and its performance has been optimized.
  • Exchange 2013 RTM CU1 will support the Exchange Server 2013 Management Pack for System Center Operations Manager (SCOM); this management pack will be available at a later date. This management pack is supported on SCOM 2007 R2 and SCOM 2012.

On behalf of the Exchange Product Group, thanks again for your continued support and patience, and please keep the feedback coming.

Exchange Team


Not applicable

Couldn’t disagree more!

The whole notion about "modern public folder" and "polished OWA" is just nonsense, respectfully.

1. OWA display is simply awful!

2. ZERO taste in color options. (The entire universe is about options, not limitations!)

3. The text is hard to see even with 20/20 vision

4. The interface is very unpleasant.

5. Free email providers offer far more aesthetics and flexibility than OWA with Exchange 2013

6. In OWA, the address list is hard to find

7. Managing Public Folders is not an option in OWA. It was fine in 2010 but useless in 2013. Someone had to break it!

8. If User A creates a Public Folder (PF) using Outlook 2010 client, that A does not (NOT) see that PF in OWA. Unless user A goes to subscribe that PF.  The situation is not funny when we are talking about hundreds of PFs.

9. In MAC, EVERY PF, had to be subscribed in Outlook. Now the same is true on OWA!

10. Speaking of MAC, they are going beyond retina display while OWA is going the other way!

11. What's wrong with selecting a group of users and enabling their email address? You can’t multi select users to mail-enable with highly polished Exchange 2013!

12. The Exchange Admin Center web should reflect EAC, not ECP (Exchange Control Panel)

13. So much empty space on EAC, but there is no space to add additional properties for users. How does that make sense?

Not applicable

What is everyone using for sizing?  What is the suggested ration of CAS to MBX for Exchange 2013?

Not applicable

@Modern? I dont think so!:

The whole Office 2013 color scheme is a tragedy. Huge amounts of screen space wasted by bright white. 90% of some screens are just a wasteland of white screaming into your brain and giving you a headache. OWA2013 is the same way, and you are correct, there are many problems. Public Folders are broken, plain and simple. Shared mailboxes don't even work at all, so you can just throw that feature right out of your current plans. Even the OWA offline mode is a joke as it will only sync 20 folders and no more. If you look on the Technet forums you will see hundreds and hundreds of complaints about this same thing.

It's a cruel joke that is being played on us Exchange Administrators, that's for sure. Release products WAY before they are ready and spend the next year patching things up so we can finally have a RTM-capable experience.

Surely even the Microsoft team can see all the deficiencies in their product. Even with CU1.

Not applicable

I see a lot of valid potential comparisons between Exchange and the new EA SimCity.

Not applicable

Definitely a poorly written platform in very many ways!

I have the feeling that it has VISTA written all over it! Exchange, in the past have been a flagship product by Microsoft and the world class messaging system. But the rush to get this out of coding house so that it is in line with other MS Product release was a poor judgment call by product managers in Exchange Team. We are seriously debating if we should continue on with our existing non-Microsoft email platform.  - Shah

Not applicable

It's like the Exchange team just let out a big juicy long fart in an elevator and we all have to endure the stench until we finally reach the top floor. The Exchange team then slightly giggles and tries to ignore the stares from the adults in the room.


Brian Taylor, ETR Services


Not applicable

Exchange 2013 Address Book Policy Routing Agent Issue with Mailboxes Hidden From the Address Lists

When the AddressBookPolicyRoutingEnabled attribute is enabled by running Set-TransportConfig -AddressBookPolicyRoutingEnabled $True, I am having an issue with delivery failures for mailboxes that are hidden from the address book. I receive the following

undeliverable message:

'532 5.3.2 STOREDRV.Deliver; Missing or bad StoreDriver MDB properties'

If I disable the AddressBookPolicyRoutingEnabled attribute by running Set-TransportConfig -AddressBookPolicyRoutingEnabled $False then emails are successfully delivered to the mailbox that is hidden from the address list.

I followed the installation instructions here:

Below is the status of the ABP Routing Agent on my Hub Transport/Mailbox server:

Enabled: True

Priority: 5

TransportAgentFactory: Microsoft.Exchange.Transport.Agent.AddressBookPolicyRoutingAgent.AddressBookPolicyRoutingAgentFactory

AssemblyPath: C:Program FilesMicrosoftExchange ServerV15TransportRolesagentsAddressBookPolicyRoutingAgentMicrosoft.Exchange.Transport.Agent.AddressBookPolicyRoutingAgent.dll

Identity: ABP Routing Agent

IsValid: True

ObjectState: New

Has anyone else run into this issue yet?

Not applicable

@ ExchangeKiller - That looks very likely to be a bug. Can you please open a case up with support so they can gather the information to debug.

Not applicable

My upgrade from 2013RTM to CU1 ran perfectly - a big thumbs up.

I am disappointed that, in OWA, there appears to be no way to mark email in the public folder as junk - you cannot even move mail from a PF, other than delete mail. I was also expecting more functionality to manage the anti-spam/malware from the ECP to be added. I really think that MSFT need to do more in this area.

Not applicable

Don't blame the Exchange team. I'm sure they had to release this by a certain date which Microsoft has imposed.

I think I will skip CU1 until there is a rollup or something similar to fix the bugs. Exchange team, can you confirm if there will be the usual rollups for CU1, or are we waiting for CU2?

Not applicable

"Don't blame the Exchange team. I'm sure they had to release this by a certain date which Microsoft has imposed."

Imagine releasing a product and knowing that your customers can't install it alongside the previous version. How can anyone overlook critical system functionality? If someone did impose this on the Exchange product group, then they should be canned. No developer would want their product shown in this light. I still feel the state of 13 has currently not caught up to the 10 version. The colors are simply god-awful too.

Not applicable

hi good news

but i want to download this program how to download?

Not applicable

Exchange 2013 CU1 Breaks my Transport Agent

I have a transport agent that works fine with Exchange 2013 RTM, but no longer installs with Exchange 2013 CU1!

install-transportagent fails with:

Error: The TransportAgentFactory type "xxxxx.yyyyy" doesn't exist. The TransportAgentFactory type must be the Microsoft .NET class type of the transport agent factory.

So I rebuilt the agent with the dlls shipped in CU1, and it installed and worked fine!

I am referring to these dlls of course:



This is not good enough because I don’t want to redistribute a different agent build for each CU that MS releases.

Here are the details of my agent:

* VS 2012 C#

* .NET Framework 4

Project References to the MS DLLs are configured with Specific Version = False

Not applicable

Eminenttours offers you to Discover Amazing Vacationer Destinations in Bangkok Tour Package. Bangkok is a sophisticated town frequented by tourist from all over the globe. It has some of the significant fascination of the nation and so it matters high number of tourist all the year long.  Call us@ +91-9953920605,  9811147548, 9654319636.

<a href="">Bangkok Tour Package</a>

<a href="">Tour Packages For Goa</a>

<a href="">Rajasthan Tour Packages</a>

Not applicable


Welcome to the wonderful world of massive Exchange bugs that 2013 has introduced. Just wait until you discover all the stress inducing changes to OWA. I don't think things are going to stabilize enough to deploy this software until Service Pack 1 is released. CU1 is better, but it's obvious to everyone in the community that this product was released too soon due to having to meet the Windows 8/Office2013 launch schedule. Too many broken and or buggy features to be reliable enough to deploy in production.

Not applicable


I'm supporting Ex2010SP3 environment with 1500+ GALs. GALs and Address books are segregated using Address Book Policies introduced in 2010SP2. Multi-tenancy hosting guide for 2010SP2 also says that that GAL limit also was lifted by making linked attributes.


It is no longer necessary to run the makegallinked.exe tool or change the schema definition properties of the GlobalAddressList attribute in Active Directory to enable you to create more than 1000 GALs. Once you reach the default limit of the GlobalAddressList attribute (approximately 1250 with the Windows Server 2008 Active Directory schema) you will receive a warning that the GAL you are attempting to create will only be accessible by users with a mailbox on Exchange 2010 SP2.

NOTE: It is not supported (nor is it necessary) to run the makegallinked.exe tool or change the schema definition properties of the GlobalAddressList attribute in Active Directory in a new Exchange Server 2010 SP2 installation, you simply need to ensure the Active Directory is operating at the correct forest functional level and you use only the 2010 versions of the New-GlobalAddressList cmdlet.


And this makes sense.. I still can create GALs in Ex2010 even I'm way above 1250 limit...

Unfortunately it is not the case with Exchange 2013. I introduced Ex2013 into this organization. installation went smoothly. I have working coexistence. What doesn’t work is GALs.. I CANNOT create any new GALs. I receive weird error:

WARNING: One or more global address lists were missing from the Active Directory attribute. This is likely caused by using legacy Exchange management tools to create global address lists.

and it is failing with statement that "One or more attribute entries of the object "CN=Mincrosoft Exchange,CN=..." already exists.

Looks like Ex2013CU1 "forgot" about removed GAL limitation in Ex2010SP2. It seems that it is missing some GALs (we I have ~300 GALs on top of official 1250 limit) and it cannot create new one because it thinks that it already exists, but it is not..

Has anyone else ran into this issue. Is there a potential workaround or fix?  Is there quick fix to enable linked attrobute for GlobalAddressList and GLobalAddressList2?

Not applicable

@ Mindaugas  - we have a bug in 2013 new-gal that limits the GALs to 1500 - we have already fixed it and the fix is included in CU2, so until then, you should be able to just use the 2010 new-gal cmdlet, please don't fiddle around in AD trying to change anything, it's the cmdlet logic that broke, not the overall way the feature is supposed to work.

Not applicable

Hello, I have an error like the following discussion. I get in touch with Microsoft Support in Italy but they didn't find a bug on the database bug, why ? Anyway I solved as suggested in the forum. I wait for your reply to update Microsoft Support in Italy, thank you. the discussion is here:

Not applicable

Greg Taylor at et all @ MSFT - - I saw a mention of "CU2" in your comment..  Is that going to be out soon?


Not applicable

take a read of - CU's are going to be quarterly.

Not applicable

Anyone knows if the Public Folder FIASCO is going to be handled a bit more professionally on CU2? There are more limitations on OWA when it comes to managing (or doing anything for that matter) Public Folders than what can be done on PF using OWA - basically close to nothing!! It was fine on 2010 OWA but totally botched up on 2013.  I guess the developers were in tuned with old mantra - "PFs are gonna go to SharePoint"  

If the direction is "move to Share Point" then we need to know before we spend more resources on testing 2013.

Not applicable

As of today, Exchange 2013 Deployment Assistant URL still displays that that upgrading from Exchange 2007 or Exchange 2010 is “COMING SOON!!” This shows that how poorly the internal departments (Exchange Team) are coordinating.

So far, in my tests, I found no reasons to upgrade due to so many bugs, limitations, poor OWA design, PF management, and performance hits! Now that multiple roles are running on a single MB server, I noticed a major difference between the performance of Exchange 2010 box and Exchange 2013 box. All the updates are cosmetics (with poor ingredients I must add) and not much to gain. Did anyone notice that Exchange 2013 is actually more similar to Exchange 2003? (Including the removal of 0 with 1).

Not applicable

I don't want EAC. EAC has way too many limitations and missing features over EMC. To add more pain, now the CU's are going to have to be applied every 3-6 months requiring downtime? We can't even add a database now without stopping and restarting everything.

Talk about stupid.

Not applicable

I just completed our first client transition to Exchange 2013.  We only coexisted for 36 hours and then successfully removed Exchange 2010.  The AD for the client is mature and is at least 20 years old.  No big issues at all.

Not applicable

You stated in the article :"When you deploy the first Exchange 2013 Mailbox server in an existing Exchange organization, a new default Offline Address Book is created.".

How is generated this new Default Offline Address Book?  It's an exact copy of the existing Default Offline Address Book found, for example, on a legacy Exchange server 2010, or it's simply a totally new Default Offline Address Book?

In other words, if I created in Exchange 2010 a Default Offline Address Book customized to contain specific address lists (other than the Dafault GAL), when I install Exchange 2013 how can I migrate that customized Default Offline Address Book to Exchange 2013?

Not applicable

I am wondering when CU2 is going to come out that will actually stabilize mail flow.  Like many many many others - I have had to set the Hub Transport Service to restart ( which it does about every 4 to 6 hrs a day, every day).  Today mail flow on the SMTP receive connector just decided to up and quit.  after 2 reboots it began working again - but the point is - first a foremost Exchange Servers should be able to Send And Receive Mail - Second - Internal Domain Clients should be able to connect.  Third and last - External OWA / Phone / And RPC.  This new version - when something breaks - everything breaks. In the past at least I NEVER had to worry about the First TWO Primary functions.

By the Way config was Exchange 2003 - migrated to 2010 - Migrated to 2013 on a Server 2012 box with 12GB Ram Virtualized on Xenserver 6.5

Not applicable

Dear Team,

I have upgraded my enterprise exchange 2013 edition with ure CU1.

Why the hell I have now AFTER INSTALLING CU1 a STANDARD Version? Is this a Joke?!


Not applicable

Daniel, I can't reproduce this. Can you explain a bit more about what you did and what you saw?

Not applicable

We are just planning our Exchange Server 21013 migration because there is a opportunity to do it as part of other server upgrades. Nothing i read here fills me with any confidence in the product. The concept and execution of how CU works just sounds brain damaged with so many obvious ways to go horribly wrong i can't imagine how it ever got to see the light of day.

I too have been using exchange since V4.0 and the starting with 2007 version it has just gone down hill in horrible ways since then and continues to loose some of its best features each edition. Management of exchange is certainly a much greater chore to do basic everyday tasks than ever before. Microsoft clearly have very little idea of how their product is used in the real world and I suspect a very healthy contempt for those of us who are not happy with what we've been lumped with.

Exchange used to be such a good product, it is barely a shadow of its former self.

Not applicable

Hi @Brian, there was a question done by @Jjj saying: "This update does not recognize disabled owa access. If I go into the eac and disable owa, the user still has access. Owa is really flakey inngeneral and public folder data is not working right either.

What a mess exchange has become."

And you say to check the KB 2835562. I read the article and the workaround suggested is:

For on-premises Exchange Server

Use Active Directory Users and Computers to disable mailbox access by removing the user’s ability to log on to the Active Directory environment. To do this, follow these steps:1.Open Active Directory Users and Computers.

2.Locate the user whose information you want to edit. To do this, use the Find feature. Or, browse to the organizational unit to which the user belongs.

3.Double-click the user, and then, in the <UserName> Properties dialog box, click the Account tab.

4.Under Account options, select Account is disabled, and then click OK.

Is it my bad english or I understood to disable the user account??? I mean, disable the user account? What if the user goes to the office, needs to logon to his machine, needs to logon to Lync or any other service that use authentication?

(isn't easier to send the employee on undetermined vacations, delete his user account. When MS decides to release CU2 we call the employee back "hey man, vacations are over, come back to work", and we recreate the account? XD XD)

Anyways, there are 2 workarounds I see for this situation.

1. If you have domain-joined ISA or TMG, you can put the users exceptions directly in the OWA publishing rule. Bingo!

2. The above option will only work for Internet users. Any internal user may browse the OWA site bypassing the Publishing server.

In this scenario I onced used this feature:

URL Authorization Feature Requirements (IIS 7)

Create a Deny Rule for URL Authorization (IIS 7)

"Applies To: Windows 7, Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows Vista

Create a Deny rule when you want to prevent access to Web content for specific roles, groups, or users. If you want to further restrict the actions a client request can take, you can also specify that the server will only evaluate this rule when the client

attempts to use certain HTTP verbs—for example, GET or POST."

As the article says, applies to W2008R2. So I don't know if this would work in W2012 (which has IIS8). But if you have Ex2013 running under W2008R2, feel free to test!!!

Honestly, I can't believe Microsoft recommends to disable the user account! XD


(sorry for my bad english)

Not applicable

Hi all. First of all, I'm not a MS employee. Actually, I'm unemployed, and doing some freelance jobs for the past 3 months. I'm just giving my opinion about it.

Many of the comments I saw in this article, is the complain about not able to perform "in place upgrades", or roll back the CU version.

This is no new for us guys! ever since Exchange 2003 (released back in 2003), there was no in place upgrade already. Of course Exchange 2003 is 32bits, and Exchange 2007+ are all x64 (Ex2007 x86 was released, but not supported in production environments). So everyone here, working with Exchange 2003, 2007 and 2010, are already used to this situation. why are complaining now? Again, this has been going since 2003. So, again, this is no new for us.

I agree with all of you saying there is no rollback option. At least in Exchange 2007/2010, the model was: service packs (full builds) and rollup (update builds). Rollups were able to be removed without affecting the whole product. but talking about SPs, it was not possible.

So saying that I update from Exchange 2010 SP1 to SP2, it is the same situation we have now for Exchange 2013.

My suggestion here for Exchange 2013, would be that in some way, we could rollback to the previous CU. If I have been installing like 10 CUs, if I want to remove the #10, at least, I should be able to rollback to CU9.

Anyways, the workaround I see here (and the one I used for Exchange 2007/2010) is, before performing any upgrade, to take a full AD backup, and an Exchange backup (more important DBs and Certificates of the server involved).

If I was upgrading, Exchange 2010 SP1 to SP2, and something went wrong in the middle, I could expect that:

.attributes in AD may reflect the exchange server in SP1, and some other attributes in SP2.

.In the server itselft, some exchange binary files could be SP1, or SP2.

.same for registry information, some could reflect SP1 settings, some SP2 settings, and the famous "watermarks" in each role.

Not applicable

(continuing above comment)...

So, reaching this point, you can:

1. restore your AD backup. (all attributes, schema changes, and domain permissions in AD should be back to SP1).

2. then you can just format the server, reset the Computer account, reinstall the box with same name, rejoin to the domain, and install exchange (with SP1 installation files) with the "recoverserver" switch.

3. After the installation, just restore your DBs, and certificate.

the server should be, back again, working in SP1.

You all may think, "something that should take an hour at most, will take me 4 or 5", yes, I agree with you. "this will require a lot of admin interaction, and work with DCs and Exchange", yes, I agree as well. "In large organizations, restoring AD will cause a replication storm", YES! I agree with you again. "what about AD changes that were performed during the upgrade time? if there was any work done in AD, that would be lost by restoring our back!", yes, but be honest with me, many times we upgrade Exchange, we demand a maintenance window, and not much changes are done in AD aside the ones we performed, the the possibility is that there are no other changes done. But...

Is it a valid workaround? YES it is! is it possible to achieve? yes it is! Are all the procedures in the workaround supported and valid by MS? yes, they are!

So, I know is not easy, but it is a workaround. At least, in the worst case scenario, you still have a contingency plan with this.

If you guys have a better workaround, please, share it with us all!!

So, that's all. And at last but not least, if MS would develop a 100% perfect product, there will be no job for us!!! the ones who offer Services, consulting and support!!! XD XD XD

(sorry for my bad english again)

Not applicable

We have canned the Exchange 2013 installation after working with it for couple of months! It had nothing to offer compare to Exchange 2010.  All the initial articles (many are on this page..) about how great Exchange 2013 was, I just realized that those were nothing but sarcasm!

Not applicable

We found the SCOM 2012 management pack for Exchange 2012 more than doubled the replication traffic to our remote backup site. Do you guys know what you're doing? Evidence of how poorly your product works suggests not.

Does it make sense to anyone that monitoring the health of the product should add more traffic than 200 active users of the product? Absolutely ridiculous! Needless to say, we can't afford the bandwidth to run the management pack because is it so badly implemented.

Not applicable

It nice that the group management by groups is back, but is not something to be excited about, it is something to be deeply ashamed was necessary. It proves how profoundly out of touch developers are with how your product is used. The inconvenience and extra management burden has been significant and prolonged. There is no positive spin to be had.

Not applicable

can any one plese send be the complete manual for the  exchange server2013 on my email

Version history
Last update:
‎Jul 01 2019 04:12 PM
Updated by: