Released: Exchange Server 2013 RTM Cumulative Update 1

[The_Exchange_Team]

• download
• release notes

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

Updates

• 4/2/2013: Added info about Exchange 2013 documentation updates for CU1, including Release Notes.
• Also check out High Availability Changes in Exchange Server 2013 Cumulative Update 1 on Scott Schnoll's blog.
• 4/3/2013: Updated info about Exchange 2013 documentation (updated for CU1).

[#2]

I have installed SP3 and CU1, and when I do a Get-ExchangeServer on my 2013 server, it shows both my 2010 and 2013 servers.  But, when I do Get-ExchangeServer on my 2010 server, it only shows my 2010 server.

Is that normal?

[#3]

@ MSFT

Thanks for the new technet documentation

In the "How do you know this worked" in the AD preparation, I can't find anywhere in the documentation the values for CU1.

For example, msExchProductID I have 15.00.620.029 but the documentation has 15.00.526.032 which I assume is still for the original release.  And so on for the other checks.

I'm pretty sure I'm good to go but it would be nice to have the corresponding CU1 checks documented, unless I'm missing something...

[#4]

I started migrating the mailboxes from Exchange 2010 and hit a snag when there is no option to move resource mailboxes in EAC. Do those need to be moved using EMS? I may be bad at reading the TechNet manuals or that part may be missing from the move mailboxes section there. Also was wondering if there was a document describing removing the last Exchange 2010 server from the environment after deploying Exchange 2013, like change the OAB generation servers, remove connectors and what not?

[#5]

Steve - you're right, that topic needs to be updated for CU1. We'll get on that right away. Thanks for catching this. If I'm able to, I'll post the relevant info in a follow up comment while we're waiting for the topic to update.

[#6]

Exchange 2010 Edge Servers seem to still be blocking Exchange 2013 installs with the "must upgrade to SP3" error even though SP3 is installed, read on TN forums it's due to edge servers not updating version in AD, when is that going to get fixed?

[#7]

Hi,

thanks for CU1!

Can you please publish the slides of ignite webcast (link mentioned in webcast is no more available)?

Thanks in advance

Lars

[#8]

Well, this CU1 setup has been a f.... nightmare! On one exchange server it failed at first because I had set the powershell execution policy through GPO. If you do, setup will not only fail, but it will if run again constantly deactivate all exchange related services and then fail when it tries restarting them.

Still trying to install on the second exchange server. I get this:

   Mailbox role: Client Access service                       FAILED

    The following error was generated when "$error.Clear();

       Start-SetupProcess -Name "iisreset" -Args "/noforce /timeout:120"

" was run: "Process execution failed with exit code 1052.".

The Exchange Server setup operation didn't complete. More details can be found

in ExchangeSetup.log located in the <SystemDrive>:ExchangeSetupLogs folder.

How about some more quality out of Redmond? Thank you!!

[#9]

@JasonG, that is normal behavior for an Edge Transport server.  Edge does not reach back into the org's internal AD configuration partition where the server metadata is stored. I beleive we mentioned this during the Ignite Webcast on coexistence/deployment towards the beginning of this post, but all you need to do is re-do the Edge Subscription which will bump the version #s to match what Edge currently has installed. Once you see 14.3.x in your server list the 2013 setup will be unblocked.

[#10]

More problems. Now the search service is throwing errors. I am sick and tired of this new Exchange BS. We still cannot even get Exchange out of testing. complete and total BS here.

[#11]

If you have the RTM version of Exchange 2013 and you are upgrading to CU1 you may run into an issue with the UCMA 4.0 not being the correct version.  Originally the UCMA 4.0 version was a 'Preview' version (5.0.8132.0) which was downloaded from download.microsoft.com/.../UcmaRuntimeSetup.exe.  Now the CU1 requirements looks like it has the same UCMA 4.0 component listed as a requirement, but the download is located at download.microsoft.com/.../UcmaRuntimeSetup.exe.  The version of this UCMA is now 5.0.8308.0.  It would be nice if there was some reference on this post or the Release Notes that this is something to be aware of.  Thanks.

[#12]

WARNING: Exchange 2013 RTM CU1 changed the behavior on where MonitoringMailboxes (HealthMailbox<Guid>) are created. In RTM, they were created in the default container for the Root Domain (usually, in the "Users" container). In CU1 they are created in the "Exchange System Objects/Monitoring Mailboxes" container.

This causes an issue when removing Mailbox Databases: when a HealthMailbox connects to ActiveSync to test searchive health, a subcontainer is created for their pseudo-ActiveSync Device. When removing a Mailbox Database, the Exchange Trusted Subsystem attempt to delete the mailbox, but fails. This is because the Exchange Trusted Subsystem DO NOT have the "Delete Subtree" permissions in this container/user objects.This causes the Cmdlet to issue a warning that the Mailbox Couldn't be deleted.

Shame...

One possible resolution (I haven't tested yet) is to grand the DeleteSubTree permission to the ETS group on the Monitoring Mailboxes container and apply to user/inetOrgPerson objects.

[#13]

Update on the previous warning: actually, this is the "Exchange Servers" group which has an explicit DENY on the "Exchange System Objects" container for the "DeleteSubTree" permission. Since Exchange Servers belong to that group, they are indeed prevented to delete objects when they have a subobject (DeleteTree() method in ADSI). So adding permissions for the ETS group is useless unless permissions are EXPLICITELY GRANTED on each HealthMailbox<Guid> object, or if the explicit deny is removed from the "Exchange System Objects" container...

[#14]

@JAUCG: you shouldn't have installed UCMA 4.0 Preview at first. UCMA 4.0 RTM has shipped the same date as Lync 2013 and this is the version that had to be used, even in Exchange 2013 RTM... :p

[#15]

@Benoit Boudeville

The download link for UCMA Preview was the one provided by the requirements page of Exchange 2013 RTM at the time of its release.  It was not listed as a preview version, I only noticed this when I was reviewing registry entries after CU1 hiccup'd on the UCMA version.

[#16]

@Steve and others - here are the values you can use to validate successful preparation of Active Directory. I'm working to get this information updated in the topic ASAP.

In the Configuration naming context, verify that the msExchProductId property in the CN=<your organization>,CN=Microsoft Exchange,CN=Services,CN=Configuration,DC=<domain> container is set to 15.00.620.029.

Note: If the msExchProductId property is set to 15.00.620.029, Active Directory has been successfully prepared. You don’t need to check any of remaining values in this list. The information below is for information purposes only and for those who separate the PrepareSchema and PrepareAD steps.

In the Schema naming context, verify that the rangeUpper property on ms-Exch-Schema-Verision-Pt is set to 15254.

In the Configuration naming context, verify that the objectVersion property in the CN=<your organization>,CN=Microsoft Exchange,CN=Services,CN=Configuration,DC=<domain> container is set to 15614.

In the Default naming context, verify that the objectVersion property in the Microsoft Exchange System Objects container under DC=<root domain is set to 13236.

[#17]

I have deployed 2 pilots for coexistence with Exchange 2007 and 1 Production environment in progress. I have the following problems:

1. In production environment, once mailboxes are moved from Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2013, outlook 2007 clients cannot connect and always keep asking password (same behaviour that I had on coexistence from ex2007 and ex2013 RTM). In pilot environments I don't have this problem. Configuration of Outlook Anywhere and Autodiscovery as well as Virtual Directories and Certificates are identical and they are done according documentation with CU1.

2. Once mailboxes are moved from Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2013, mailboxes cannot be moved back to Exchange 2007. The migration task starts and then shows "total mailbox 0, synced 0, finalized 0, failed 0" and no error in return.

Any ideas?

[#18]

@Mo.Ma., please check what version of Outlook 2007 you are running. The minimum supported Outlook 2007 version for Exchange 2013 is "2007 SP3 + the november 2012 Public Update" or later. This would be version 12.0.6665.5000 or higher if you look at Outlook.exe's version through Windows Explorer. For Outlook 2010 the minimum is "2010 SP1 + November 2012 Public Update" which is version 14.0.6126.5000 or higher.

[#19]

A general comment to everyone. We also watch the Exchange Server Forums at social.technet.microsoft.com/.../exchangeserver and this is often a much easier location to help work through things given the better interface the forums have for interaction with each other. Hope to see you there. :)

[#20]

@Brian. Thanks for the suggestion, I will folloup on forums. Just for information for other people I think we Isolated the problem, but I am working with Microsoft Support to better understand.

Actually we tested Outlook 2007 SP3 with Outlook.exe newest version 12.0.6668.5000 (updated today with a Windows Update on the computers).

This version DOES NOT WORK either with NTLM or BASIC authentication of Outlook Anywhere.

Older version 12.0.6607.1000 works perfectly with either NTLM and BASIC.... pretty strange huh? :)

[#21]

@Mo.Ma., shoot me the case # if you can as I'd be interested in the outcome; brian dot day at microsoft dot com

[#22]

I am having two issues. First, some Outlook 2007 clients do not appear to work correctly. It appears to be version related. The second issue is that our backups are now out of control. Updating to cu1 appears to have easily made our backups 10x bigger. We are working with PSS now before we move the users onto the server.

[#23]

I updated a single server running Exchange 2013 RTM last night without issue; however, I am now finding OWA is  very flakey.  When I select an existing message I see this: "Error: Your request can't be completed right now. Please try again later." in the message body.  Eventually the message body will display but this is quite irritating.  I'll have to take a look on the server and see what errors (if any) are happening there.  When I create a new message I may also get this error when I click Send".

Rob

[#24]

CU1 broke the ability to use pipelineing with Set-ServerComponentState.

Typically if $Servers is a list of server objects (retrieve with Get-ExchangeServer) and I do $Servers | Set-ServerComponentState -Component foo -State bar -Requester Maintenance, then Cmdlet throws an Exception (object reference not set to an object). When using the same command using the -Identity parameter (eg: in a foreach) either using the "Name" or "Fqdn" property, this works as a workaround...

[#25]

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.

[#26]

There is a massive DPM bug in this release. White space is being flagged as changed data and URL pilot backup system just crashed due to completely running out of space. Restores may not work right either.we cannot move forward with this version unless this is solved.

What is the status of a workaround or fix?

[#27]

@Jjj - indeed, we are aware of this problem. Please see this KB article: support.microsoft.com/.../2835562

[#28]

Can someone explain the new "/mapi" WebService (MapiHttpHandler and NspiHttpHandler) ? what use? is it to replace the Ex2010's RCA/AB ?

[#29]

@Benoit, that is reserved for internal MS testing at this time and is not currently used by on-premises Exchange.

[#30]

@Brian: thanks for the info :p

Other feedback on CU1: while I could upgrade several servers in a pre-prod forest (before going in live production later) without any issue (besides some new minor bugs introducted in CU1 :P) I had some issues with my lab where the EWS virtual directory for the Exchange Back End web site was present in AD but not in IIS !!!

Therefore, CU1 B2B upgrade failed miserably.

Workaround: do a "repair" of the EWS virtual directory. Eg from a standard shell on the server:

Add-PSSnapin -Name Microsoft.Exchange.Management.PowerShell.E2010

$BackEndSiteName = "Exchange Back End"

Get-WebServicesVirtualDirectory -Server $env:COMPUTERNAME -ShowBackEndVirtualDirectories -ADPropertiesOnly |? { $_.Name.Contains($BackEndSiteName) } | Remove-WebServicesVirtualDirectory -Confirm:$false

New-WebServicesVirtualDirectory -Server $env:COMPUTERNAME -WebSiteName $BackEndSiteName -Role Mailbox -WindowsAuthentication:$true -WSSecurityAuthentication:$true -GzipLevel High

After recreating the EWS VDir in IIS re-run the Exchange setup in upgrade mode and voila !

[#31]

Wow. This release is terrible. Destroyed two Client Access servers in a straight upgrade, and ate up hours of work in wiping the servers clean after the install was left in such an inconsistent state. Worst: clean install - authentication problems. I'd rather use RTM and skip this release.

[#32]

Hello,

I have noticed that there is an upgrade option for the unattend.   with this option am I able to do an inplace upgrade from exchange 2010 Sp3 to Exchange 2013?   if not is there a way to other than having to install the new exchange on a completely new server, migrate all mailboxes to that and decom the exchange 2010 server.

Thanks

[#33]

@manf0001, setup /m:upgrade for CU1 is only for upgrading from 2013 RTM. Later on when CU2 ships that mode could be used to upgrade from RTM or CU1. You cannot in-place upgrade from an earlier version of Exchange.

[#34]

Another bugy release. I know this was delayed, but really it should have been delayed another month at least. We had one server where, as Benoit suggests in this thread, had to have the entire EWS rebuilt. Now the latest is we are waiting on a post CU1 patch in order to backup the system. For some reason the backups are no longer working in this release, but they were in the rtm. OWA seems flakey and public folder support really doesn't work. Sharepoint integration for discovery also doesn't seem to work.

Total failure as far as I'm concerned. Exchange people have spent way too much time worrying about the cloud offerings and it shows. The on-premise version of Exchange, as it stands now, is the buggyst version of Exchange I've ever tried to use.

My only question is that will exchange finally get it right with cu2 or do we have to start looking at some other options here?

[#35]

Is it not possible to upgrade a server that is 2010 SP3 to 2013 CU1 using the above installer? I am getting a disaster recovery mode error of some sort in my lab. It tells me to use /m:RecoverServer. when I run that I get the error:

setup /m:RecoverServer /IAcceptExchangeServerLicenseTerms

Welcome to Microsoft Exchange Server 2013 Cumulative Update 1 Unattended Setup

Setup checks failed: Earlier versions of the server roles that are installed

were detected.

[#36]

@Soy - That is correct; we have not supported "between version" upgrades with Exchange for a while now. You cannot in-place upgrade from any version of Exchange 2010 to any version of Exchange 2013. What you should do is install into the same org and then move the mailboxes over.

[#37]

Is there a process for rolling back CU1?  Installed it on a production server and install fails half way through and I get this:

"Failure configuring SearchFoundation through installconfig.ps1 - Error occurred while configuring Search Foundation for Exchange.System.TimeoutException: Timed out waiting for Admin node to be up and running at Microsoft.Ceres.Exchange.PostSetup.DeploymentManager.WaitForAdminNode(String hostControllerNetTcpWcfUrl) at Microsoft.Ceres.Exchange.PostSetup.DeploymentManager.Install(String installDirectory, String dataDirectoryPath, Int32 basePort, String logFile, Boolean singleNode, String systemName, Boolean attachedMode)

[#38]

@Brian Day and Nino Bilic,   is there a reason why there is no inplace upgrade option for exchange?  it seems like a lot of work to install a new version of exchange on a different server and move the mail boxes over.  Would there be an option at a future date,

Also is there a exchange feature request web page, where we can suggest features that we would like to see in upcoming releases?

Thanks

[#39]

@manf0001: You can email your feature requests or other feedback to exwish at Microsoft dot com.

[#40]

What are the recommended procedures for uninstalling cu1? We are not having good success and would like to uninstall cu1 and wait until cu2 or sp1. Thank you.

[#41]

@Reggie: given that CU's are now full releases and "Builg-to-Build Upgrades", there's no option to remove CU's, the only option is to uninstall everything and reinstall a previous build. It makes rollback very difficult or even nearly impossible for smallest organizations. Typically one clean approach would be to install a new server (or multiple servers if neeeded) on RTM side by side, move services/config and mailboxes from previos DBs to the new ones... I must admit this is unfair :(

[#42]

So there is no way to uninstall an update, we can't in-place upgrade anything, and support is only good for the current and one single cu back?. Sorry, I have to say that was a very, very poor design decision. This is going to make my job much harder. Well, now I'm off to install a brand new Exchange server, go through all the configuration, migrate all my mailboxes to it, and then decommission the original one. Hours of work because you can't rollback an update. Rolling back updates is something we've been able to do for the past 20 years, so pardon me if I say this is a surprising change and degraded feature-set we've come to expect over the years.

[#43]

Where is Sent Items Management?  This feature was put into Exchange 2010 SP3 formally, but forgotten in Exchange 2010 RTM CU1?  How did that one get past QA?  Imagine telling your customer that yes, you have this great feature in SP3 and once we install SP3 you will be able to upgrade to 2013.  However, if you go to Exchange 2013, you will lose this same great feature.  

While I understand that Sent Items Management is not a game changer or a show stopper of a feature, it still makes the point that CU1 still seems rushed even with the late release date.

I would also like to add that according to the EAC, when I add a new database I need to restart the Information Store service on the server.

[#44]

1. How do I get past the 50 database limit? In Exchange 2010 you could create up to 100 databases. Now with the new improved Exchange 2013 engine we can only have 50? So, what's the trick to raising this limit?

2. How do we get team mailboxes working from an owa client?

3. How can we view more than about 20 folders in offline mode? We have execs with hundreds of folders and OWA offline mode is not going to work unless we can access all folders offline. How can we adjust the available folders to sync offline?

4. When are you going to replace all the neat troubleshooting tools that were in the Exchange 2010 toolbox and add them into the EAC?

Thanks!

[#45]

How do we get around this "by design" limitation?

windowsitpro.com/.../exchange-2013-reduces-number-mounted-databases-50

This means that Exchange 2013 is only capable of supporting HALF what Exchange 2010 was capable of? That's nuts. Exchange 2013 should be like 4x as many databases. And in addition, we now have to stop all databases just to add a single database?

Not sure this is progress by any means.

[#46]

Woah!!! What did I just read? 2013 has a 50 database limit now? When did this change?

At our company we have six Exchange 2010 servers. Due to RPO and RTO requirements, we have to create  multiple D.A.G. with many databases. We're maxed right up with the primary databases, secondary copies, and a third copy as well. If the 50 GB database limit is true, then we can not upgrade to 2013 because it would mean we'd have to deploy 12 Exchange servers to do the same task. This also means that if we want a 3-copy DAG solution, we can't deploy over 16 primary databases on a single Exchange 2013 server.

I had no idea Exchange 2013 was so limited. Is this really true? Is there a workaround or is there an expectation in the next service pack that this limit will be raised?

[#47]

Haven't stuck my oar out here for a while:

A roll back plan is important in any upgrade/update plan, critical to many clients in fact.  Considering the numerous issues in E2010 HFRU's, being able to back out was a saving grace many a time for many of my clients.  Hopefully you'll see the light and common sense going forward to switch back.  I couldn't care less about spending some extra time installing a rollup after a new installation, but now you're breaking your own MOF rules for Operation Management and patch management. 15 years of managing exchange with many heated discussions with engineers, but I'm really truly disappointed and dismayed with this course.  I see why you might like this idea, I see the benefits I do, but this is poor direction to go.

[#48]

Korbin - you are EXACTLY correct.

I remember the old WOSSA (Windows Operating Systems and Services Architecture) and Architecture exams...waaaay back in the day when I was passing the MCSD track for VB5. Microsoft has thrown out a number of their own previous interface recommendations that were there for a very good reason!

It is simply astonishing to me that in the year 2013 we're having conversations about products that can't co-exist with previous versions, don't provide any method of rollbacks, and can't be upgraded in-place. I'm speechless honestly. I really speaks volumes to the state of things at Microsoft.

[#49]

@manf0001 - the reason why there is no in-place upgrade is that it is super-complex. In last several versions of Exchange, we have been making significant changes to database engine for example (amongst other things), rewriting significant parts of Exchange into managed code etc. It would be a very large work to enable in-place upgrades. Having been there though in the past, we have learned that despite our best efforts, if in-place upgrades go wrong, the recovery is much more painful than having to move the mailbox back, as the server can be in a semi-installed state. Lessons we learned in support showed us that it is not necessarily something that does anyone any favors...

[#50]

Nino Bilic:  I completely agree and understand why Microsoft abandoned In-place version upgrades, it has always made a lot of sense to move to new gear when you upgrade the messaging system.  I've been working with Microsoft messaging products since Courier days and there were times when the upgrade in place worked and then after a while it didn't make any sense.  HOWEVER, this new "All In" update process might equates to an In-Place ugprade, which is mystifying.  There is no way to roll back, it either works or it doesn't work.  The number of issues with CU1 are incredible and you've left customers with no easy way to roll back.  It is illogical and off the mark.  Worse, right now there doesn't seem to be any acknowlegement of these issues and "we're on it" and "we'll keep you posted" with an ETA on fixes.

Rob

[#51]

"The number of issues with CU1 are incredible"

amen brother. +1