Bruce,
All I can say is that myself and some of my colleagues did put some
pressure on to add this in. I know we sound like a broken record when we
say this, but I would strongly encourage anyone who is unhappy about
this to tell their account teams and have them put pressure on from
their side as well.
Nate
Osborne, Bruce W. (NS) wrote:
Nate,
When was this change communicated to Cisco's Clean Access customers??
It appears to me that the BU does not want this product to succeed.
Bruce Osborne
Liberty University
-----Original Message-----
From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Nathaniel Austin
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 9:45 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [CLEANACCESS] Microsoft Patch
Hey Mike,
Word from the BU is that they will only update from Microsoft once a
month, so this one will not go into the checks and rule set until next
months Patch Tuesday release.
So a preemptive apology to everyone out there who wants this now. I
think there are some good custom checks that some of you have created to
at least get it checked for in your environments in the meantime.
I know this isn't really a consolation, but I think this again proves
that the WSUS style requirement that checks against Microsoft's WU
servers instead of our checks and rules is a much better option.
Nate
Mike Diggins wrote:
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, Osborne, Bruce W. (NS) wrote:
When I last checked this afternoon, Cisco still did not have their
check published. What happened to the commitment to publish within 48
hours of patch release??
I was wondering that myself. I checked a few times today to see if it
had been published. I normally only update my CCA servers once a
month, so as not to annoy my clients too much, but this one seems like
it needs special attention.
-Mike
