Thanks Doug, someone from our network group had mentioned that you can tag traffic coming from a particular machine with a specific identifier to single it out (I can see the “It’s called an IP” jokes now). DSCP must have been what they were talking about, but I was not familiar with that until now.
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Doug Barrett Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 1:40 PM To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [mssms] RE: Changing SCCM port What about using policy-based QoS on the DP to either set a hard limit on outbound bandwidth per port/subnet/application or mark the packets with a DSCP value? From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of David McSpadden Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 2:04 PM To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [mssms] RE: Changing SCCM port So instead of them keeping a QOS list you have to keep a port/application list? Makes perfect sense to me. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 2:57 PM To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: [mssms] RE: Changing SCCM port LOL From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld Sent: Friday, January 9, 2015 12:38 PM To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: [mssms] RE: Changing SCCM port Maybe they spent some time with the security people? ;-) From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys Sent: den 9 januari 2015 19:30 To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: [mssms] RE: Changing SCCM port Wow, that’s unusual, the network guys complaining about doing their job. I’ve never heard them do that before. J From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Atkinson, Matt T Sent: Friday, January 9, 2015 10:30 AM To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: [mssms] RE: Changing SCCM port That was my suggestion, but the complaint was that maintaining a QOS list of servers which may require changes in the future if servers get added/removed across all of the network devices would be too much work and likely would not be well implemented. Hence the desire to change the ports. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Matt Browne Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 1:08 AM To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: [mssms] RE: Changing SCCM port We have looked at something similar in the past. If you are looking at just putting QoS on the download of updates etc, then it’s probably just BITS you need to be worried about (ie 80 & 443). There are many other ports that the client uses (ie RPC etc) but you probably don’t need to worry about those. We ended up creating a QoS rule for traffic to/from the main site servers and the DP’s, on those ports. Hope that helps From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Garth Jones Sent: 08 January 2015 23:49 To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: [mssms] RE: Changing SCCM port Err I would stay way from moving ports but…. Why can’t you Network team do QOS for BITS traffic? Their packetshaper should be able to do this without any problem. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Atkinson, Matt T Sent: Thursday, January 8, 2015 6:24 PM To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: [mssms] Changing SCCM port Hi All, We’ve been asked to look in to what it would take to modify the current communication port used by our SCCM 2012 environment. Although I can see how to configure it from the beginning of a deployment, and where it can be changed, details online are sparse when it comes to changing the ports for an existing environment. My fear is that changing the communication port would leave our existing clients unmanaged and require us to redeploy the client. Anyone have any experience in doing this? The end goal is for our network team to be able to apply QOS policies for SCCM based simply on the port the traffic is happening on. The major concern being content downloads from clients to DPs. The options for BITS throttling leave a lot to be desired, hence the request for QOS policies to be used instead. Thanks! Matt ________________________________ This message is intended for the sole use of the addressee, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee you are hereby notified that you may not use, copy, disclose, or distribute to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received this message in error, please immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete this message. ________________________________ Information in this message is sent in confidence and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, distribution or copying of the information is strictly forbidden. Please notify the sender immediately by return email or telephone 01823 721400. If you received this email in error please delete it and any copies of it from your system. Viridor Waste Management Limited Registered Office: Peninsula House, Rydon Lane, Exeter EX2 7HR Registered in England No. 575069 ________________________________ ________________________________ This message is intended for the sole use of the addressee, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee you are hereby notified that you may not use, copy, disclose, or distribute to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received this message in error, please immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete this message. This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. Please consider the environment before printing this email. Pomp's SpamFilter identified this as CLEAN. Give feedback: This is SPAM<http://smtp.pompstire.com/ms?k=5WCg83t.dtGe> · More<http://smtp.pompstire.com/md?k=5WCg83t.dtGe> ________________________________ This message is intended for the sole use of the addressee, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee you are hereby notified that you may not use, copy, disclose, or distribute to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received this message in error, please immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete this message.
