Mailbox Anchoring affecting new deployments & upgrades


Update2 (March 1st 2016): Microsoft has released the following blog post which states this behavior will be reverted/absent in 2013 CU12 and RTM/CU1 versionf of Exchange 2016 Remote PowerShell Proxying Behavior in Exchange 2013 CU12 and Exchange 2016

Update: Microsoft has released the following KB article to address this issue: “Cannot process argument transformation” error for cmdlets in Exchange Server 2013 with CU11

Note: This article should also apply when Exchange 2016 CU1 releases and includes Mailbox Anchoring (unless Microsoft makes a change to behavior before it’s release). So the scenario of installing the first Exchange 2016 server using CU1 bits into an existing environment would also apply.

Summary

It was announced in Microsoft’s recent blog post about Exchange Management Shell and Mailbox Anchoring that the way Exchange is managed will change going forward. Starting with Exchange 2013 CU11 (released 12/10/2015) and Exchange 2016 CU1 (soon to be released), an Exchange Management Shell session will be directed to the Exchange Server where the user who is attempting the connection’s mailbox is located. If the connecting user does not have a mailbox, an arbitration mailbox (specifically SystemMailbox{bb558c35-97f1-4cb9-8ff7-d53741dc928c) will be used instead. In either case, if the mailbox is unavailable (because it’s on a database that’s dismounted or is on a legacy version of Exchange) then Exchange Management Shell will be inoperable.

Issue

While it has always been recommended to move system and Arbitration mailboxes to the newest version of Exchange as soon as possible, there is a scenario involving Exchange 2013 CU11 which have led to customer issues:

  • Existing Exchange 2010 Environment
  • The first version of Exchange 2013 installed into the environment is CU11
  • Upon installation, the Exchange Admin is unable to use Exchange Management Shell on Exchange 2013. Thus preventing the management of Exchange 2013 objects
  • The Exchange Admin may also be unable to access the Exchange Admin Center using traditional means

This is due to the new Mailbox Anchoring changes. If the Exchange Admin’s mailbox (or the Arbitration mailbox, if the Exchange Admin did not have a mailbox) was on Exchange 2013 then this issue would not exist. However, because this was the first Exchange 2013 server installed into the environment, and it was CU11, there was no way to prevent this behavior.

This issue was first reported by Exchange MVP Ed Crowley, and yesterday a customer of mine also encountered the issue. The symptoms were mostly the same but the ultimate resolution was fairly straightforward.

Possible Resolutions

Resolution#1:

Attempt to connect to Exchange Admin Center on 2013 using the “Ecp/?ExchClientVer=15” string at the end of the URL (Reference). For Example:

I’ve heard mixed results using this method. When Ed Crowley encountered this issue, this URL worked, yet when I worked with my customer I was still unable to access EAC by using this method. However, it is worth an attempt. Once you’re connected to EAC, you can use it to move your Exchange Admin mailbox to 2013. However, should you not have a mailbox for your Exchange Admin account, this method may fail because there’s currently no way to move Arbitration Mailboxes via the EAC. So it’s recommended to create a mailbox for your Exchange Admin account using the EAC and then you’ll be able to connect via EMS.

Resolution#2:

Note: Using this method has a low probability of success as Microsoft recommends using the newer version of Exchange to “pull” a mailbox from the older version. Based on feedback I’ve received from Microsoft Support, you may consider just skipping this step and going to Step 3.

Use Exchange 2010 to attempt to move the Exchange Admin mailbox to a database on Exchange 2013. Historically, it’s been recommended to always use the newest version of Exchange to perform a mailbox move. In my experience this is hit or miss depending on the version you’re moving from and the version you’re moving to. However, it’s worth attempting:

Issue the below command using Exchange 2010 Management Shell to move the Exchange Admin’s mailbox to the Exchange 2013 server:

New-MoveRequest <AdminMailbox> -TargetDatabase <2013Database>

If the Exchange Administrator does not have a mailbox, then move the Arbitration mailboxes to Exchange 2013:

Get-Mailbox –Arbitration | New-MoveRequest -TargetDatabase <2013Database>

Resolution#3:

Connect to Exchange 2013 CU11 using Local PowerShell and manually load the Exchange modules:

  • On the Exchange 2013 CU11 Server, open a Windows PowerShell window as Administrator
  • Run the following command:
    • Add-PSSnapin Microsoft.Exchange.Management.PowerShell.SnapIn

At this point the local PowerShell module can be used to move the Exchange Admin’s mailbox to the Exchange 2013 server:

New-MoveRequest <AdminMailbox> -TargetDatabase <2013Database>

If the Exchange Administrator does not have a mailbox, then move the Arbitration mailboxes to Exchange 2013:

Get-Mailbox –Arbitration | New-MoveRequest -TargetDatabase <2013Database>

In addition, there have been reported issues with 2013 EMS still having connectivity issues even after the relevant mailboxes have been moved. A different Windows user with appropriate Exchange permissions (using a different Windows profile) will work fine however. It seems there are PowerShell cookies for the initial profile used which could still be causing problems. In this scenario, you may have to remove all listed cookies in the following registry key (Warning, edit the registry at your own risk. A backup of the registry is recommended before making modifications):

HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\WSMAN\Client\ConnectionCookies

Summary

It should be noted that while this scenario involved Exchange 2013 CU11 being installed into an existing Exchange 2010 environment, it can affect other scenarios as well:

  • Exchange 2013 CU11 or newer being installed into an existing Exchange 2010 environment
  • Exchange 2013 CU11 or newer being installed into an existing Exchange 2007 environment
  • Exchange 2016 CU1 (when released) or newer being installed into an existing Exchange 2010 environment

So unless Microsoft changes the behavior of Mailbox Anchoring, this is a precaution that should be taken when installing the first Exchange 2013 CU11/2016 CU1 (when released) server into an existing environment.

 

Edit: This forum post also describes the issue. In it, the user experiences odd behavior with the 2013 servers not being displayed if you run a Get-ExchangeServer & other odd behavior. This is similar to what I experienced in some lab testing. Ultimately, the same resolution applies.

https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/05897b40-0717-437d-90ca-d550e3226c2a/exchange-2013-cu-11-breaks-some-admin-accounts-?forum=exchangesvrdeploy

 

9 thoughts on “Mailbox Anchoring affecting new deployments & upgrades

  1. Pingback: Mailbox Anchoring affecting new deployments & upgrades | Troubleshooting Exchange | JC's Blog-O-Gibberish

    • Thanks for referencing that. I updated my post to mention it. In testing I also received the issue where the 2013 servers’s wouldn’t be displayed when running Get-ExchangeServer and the like. Ultimately, the fix is still the same.

  2. Pingback: Anchors Aweigh! | No One Uses Email Anymore

  3. Pingback: Anchors Aweigh! | No One Uses Email Anymore

  4. Pingback: Exchange Server 2013 Cumulative Update 11 Released

  5. Pingback: Is it really unsupported to use the Exchange PSSnapin? – No One Uses Email Anymore

  6. Pingback: Exchange 2013 Cumulative Update 11 – Install it or not? | Jaap Wesselius

  7. Pingback: Exchange 2013 Cumulative Update 11 – Beter niet installeren? | Jaap Wesselius

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s