[mssms] RE: Express Updates using CB 1706 + November Hotfix Rollup

[Phil Wilcock]

Nope - still pretty slow..

'Slightly' faster in the 1710 Tech preview

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Johns, Damon (DoJ)
Sent: 18 November 2017 21:50
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Express Updates using CB 1706 + November Hotfix Rollup

Hi Everyone,

We're doing some testing with Express Updates and I'm noticing that its taking 
a fair amount of time for clients to download / process the Windows 10 
Cumulative updates.

Would I be correct in assuming that this is just for the initial pass / scan 
and then subsequent update installations will be faster? Is anyone willing to 
comment on their experience with express updates under 1706?

I was under the impression that that download speed was "drastically improved" 
in 1706.

Cheers
Damon



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
The information in this transmission may be confidential and/or protected by 
legal professional privilege, and is intended only for the person or persons to 
whom it is addressed. If you are not such a person, you are warned that any 
disclosure, copying or dissemination of the information is unauthorised. If you 
have received the transmission in error, please immediately contact this office 
by telephone, fax or email, to inform us of the error and to enable 
arrangements to be made for the destruction of the transmission, or its return 
at our cost. No liability is accepted for any unauthorised use of the 
information contained in this transmission.

RE: [mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files

[Phil Wilcock]

Yes, the feature has existed for some years, – but does ConfiMgr support 
Express Updates for Windows 7?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of DonPick
Sent: 23 July 2017 00:38
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files

>> Can’t speak for WSUS standalone – but don’t think Express updates apply to 
>> Win7 anyway?

Yes, the feature has existed since WinXP;
When Win10 released it wasn’t offered, but now it’s back again...

https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/59ef7b39-c12e-4a54-aeee-59569c4ab28a/express-installation-files-in-wsus?forum=winserverwsus


Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Phil Wilcock<mailto:ph...@2pintsoftware.com>
Sent: Friday, 21 July 2017 10:23 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files

Not really a ‘bug’ – just a lack of understanding how BITS works by whoever 
wrote that piece..

‘Should be fixed in the 1706 Production release although it’s still broken in 
the TP.

Can’t speak for WSUS standalone – but don’t think Express updates apply to Win7 
anyway?

I’ve seen various threads complaining about performance though – so I would 
wait a while before enabling this again.

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 20 July 2017 18:57
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files


This sender failed our fraud detection checks and may not be who they appear to 
be. Learn about spoofing<http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSpoofing>

Feedback<http://aka.ms/SafetyTipsFeedback>

Should be fixed in the next version of ConfigMgr. Known issue.

Basically you get a BITS job for each “delta” in the patch, making it very 
slow… look at it as “free” bandwidth management! 

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Fast, David D.
Sent: den 20 juli 2017 17:48
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files

Is this “bug” specific to the SCCM SUP implementation of Express Updates?  We 
recently enabled Express Updates on our WSUS server (servicing mainly W7 OS), 
and I am less than impressed on the results.  It seems that clients take longer 
to download/install updates now than they did before.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Mead, Renae (DTMB)
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 9:19 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files

We are having issues getting Windows 10 distributed to slower sites, so we 
reached out to Microsoft, which suggested using Express updates. We turned it 
on and during testing experienced severe performance issues. It took 40 hours 
to download and install patches using Express Updates. Another machine on the 
same subnet, same DP, NOT using express updates took 15 minutes to download, 
install, and reboot. Not to mention the package grew from 4GB to 24 GB.

We reached out to Microsoft with our testing results and expressed our 
concerns; they confirmed “there was a bug that they found that causes clients 
to create numerous BITS jobs (one for each byte range for the deltas to the 
package).  Each of those jobs has it's own overhead, and latency amplifies 
that.” They did confirm the fix for express updates is in escrow for the next 
Current Branch release, which should be in the next month or so.

As others have stated Express updates are not ready for prime-time.

Thanks,
Renae Mead
DTMB IS OA Enterprise Services
mea...@michigan.gov<mailto:mea...@michigan.gov>
(517) 636-0761 Office
(517) 388-2737 Mobile

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Enley, Carl
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 10:11 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] 1702 Express Install Files

Is anyone using this feature in SCCM 1702? I was really looking forward to 
getting this up and running after the 1702 upgrade but I am a little 
disappointed with the results I am seeing.

I understand the initial download is larger and I am okay with that, my patch 
package jumped from 13.1GB to nearly 44GB so the 2-3X size increase was pretty 
accurate. My issue is the time that it is taking to install the cumulative 
update, it is taking almost 3+ hours on my test machines. The machines are all 
W10 1607 with the latest April update applied, everything in the log files 
(deltadow

[mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files

[Phil Wilcock]

Not really a ‘bug’ – just a lack of understanding how BITS works by whoever 
wrote that piece..

‘Should be fixed in the 1706 Production release although it’s still broken in 
the TP.

Can’t speak for WSUS standalone – but don’t think Express updates apply to Win7 
anyway?

I’ve seen various threads complaining about performance though – so I would 
wait a while before enabling this again.

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 20 July 2017 18:57
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files


This sender failed our fraud detection checks and may not be who they appear to 
be. Learn about spoofing

Feedback

Should be fixed in the next version of ConfigMgr. Known issue.

Basically you get a BITS job for each “delta” in the patch, making it very 
slow… look at it as “free” bandwidth management! 

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Fast, David D.
Sent: den 20 juli 2017 17:48
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files

Is this “bug” specific to the SCCM SUP implementation of Express Updates?  We 
recently enabled Express Updates on our WSUS server (servicing mainly W7 OS), 
and I am less than impressed on the results.  It seems that clients take longer 
to download/install updates now than they did before.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Mead, Renae (DTMB)
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 9:19 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files

We are having issues getting Windows 10 distributed to slower sites, so we 
reached out to Microsoft, which suggested using Express updates. We turned it 
on and during testing experienced severe performance issues. It took 40 hours 
to download and install patches using Express Updates. Another machine on the 
same subnet, same DP, NOT using express updates took 15 minutes to download, 
install, and reboot. Not to mention the package grew from 4GB to 24 GB.

We reached out to Microsoft with our testing results and expressed our 
concerns; they confirmed “there was a bug that they found that causes clients 
to create numerous BITS jobs (one for each byte range for the deltas to the 
package).  Each of those jobs has it's own overhead, and latency amplifies 
that.” They did confirm the fix for express updates is in escrow for the next 
Current Branch release, which should be in the next month or so.

As others have stated Express updates are not ready for prime-time.

Thanks,
Renae Mead
DTMB IS OA Enterprise Services
mea...@michigan.gov
(517) 636-0761 Office
(517) 388-2737 Mobile

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Enley, Carl
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 10:11 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] 1702 Express Install Files

Is anyone using this feature in SCCM 1702? I was really looking forward to 
getting this up and running after the 1702 upgrade but I am a little 
disappointed with the results I am seeing.

I understand the initial download is larger and I am okay with that, my patch 
package jumped from 13.1GB to nearly 44GB so the 2-3X size increase was pretty 
accurate. My issue is the time that it is taking to install the cumulative 
update, it is taking almost 3+ hours on my test machines. The machines are all 
W10 1607 with the latest April update applied, everything in the log files 
(deltadownload.log) indicates all is well and they are using the express files 
to install. It just takes forever to apply the update.

Is anyone else experiencing very long install times using the express install 
files? I am going to test a 1703 machine today to see if it makes any 
difference.

Thanks
Carl



The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any 
review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action 
in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the 
intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact 
the sender and delete the material from any computer.

RE: [mssms] RE: Delta Download Startup Issues

[Phil Wilcock]

Not sure now 

Either way – Express is not ready for business just yet!


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Paul Winstanley
Sent: 22 June 2017 16:23
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Delta Download Startup Issues

Yep but Tp1706 is the one due friday?

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Marable, Mike 
<mmara...@med.umich.edu<mailto:mmara...@med.umich.edu>> wrote:
It’s a gamble.  I think that SCCM will have production releases in February, 
June and October.  That’s just based on something I think Aaron said at MMS 
last month about SCCM sticking to a 3x year release plan and not following the 
2x releases of Windows 10.  I think it was Aaron, or maybe it was Michael 
Niehaus.  I’m just thinking that Microsoft is trying to get onto a predictable 
schedule with releases so that businesses can start planning ahead in 
anticipation of the releases.

That’s a lot of thinking on my part, I know.

Anyway, June could be the production release.



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Paul Winstanley
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:47 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Delta Download Startup Issues

That's a TP release though isn't it Phil?

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Phil Wilcock 
<ph...@2pintsoftware.com<mailto:ph...@2pintsoftware.com>> wrote:
Yep, don’t bother just yet. We’re informed that there are significant 
improvements arriving in 1706. And it is Friday tomorrow 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Enley, Carl
Sent: 22 June 2017 14:56
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Delta Download Startup Issues

IMHO Express files in SCCM are not ready for primetime at this point, I 
wouldn’t bother. It literally takes 4 hours to download the W10 cumulative with 
Express updates enabled. My patch package grew from 13GB to nearly 44GB in size.

With that said I assume you are on the latest 1703 client ? 5.00.8498.xxx ?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Beardsley, James
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 9:23 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] Delta Download Startup Issues

I’m having trouble implementing express updates for some reason. The “task” is 
not starting on any of my machines. Anyone have a solution to this?

This 
post<https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windows/en-US/ea82257f-5016-4ef5-9f58-e3cbfb4c4a40/express-updates-port?forum=ConfigMgrCompliance>
 on TechNet forums indicates that the machine must have the April 2017 patches 
installed. This particular machine where I took this screenshot has all of the 
latest cumulative updates installed already so I don’t know what update I could 
be missing.

[cid:image001.png@01D2EB7C.5D867290]



Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is intended only for the addressee named 
above. It contains information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise 
protected from use and disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you 
are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, or dissemination of 
this transmission, or taking of any action in reliance on its contents, or 
other use is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in 
error, please reply to the sender listed above immediately and permanently 
delete this message from your inbox. Thank you for your cooperation.






**
Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not be 
used for urgent or sensitive issues

[mssms] RE: Delta Download Startup Issues

[Phil Wilcock]

Yep, don’t bother just yet. We’re informed that there are significant 
improvements arriving in 1706. And it is Friday tomorrow 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Enley, Carl
Sent: 22 June 2017 14:56
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: Delta Download Startup Issues

IMHO Express files in SCCM are not ready for primetime at this point, I 
wouldn’t bother. It literally takes 4 hours to download the W10 cumulative with 
Express updates enabled. My patch package grew from 13GB to nearly 44GB in size.

With that said I assume you are on the latest 1703 client ? 5.00.8498.xxx ?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Beardsley, James
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 9:23 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Delta Download Startup Issues

I’m having trouble implementing express updates for some reason. The “task” is 
not starting on any of my machines. Anyone have a solution to this?

This 
post
 on TechNet forums indicates that the machine must have the April 2017 patches 
installed. This particular machine where I took this screenshot has all of the 
latest cumulative updates installed already so I don’t know what update I could 
be missing.

[cid:image001.png@01D2EB6A.56FB0D80]



Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is intended only for the addressee named 
above. It contains information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise 
protected from use and disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you 
are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, or dissemination of 
this transmission, or taking of any action in reliance on its contents, or 
other use is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in 
error, please reply to the sender listed above immediately and permanently 
delete this message from your inbox. Thank you for your cooperation.

[mssms] RE: 1702 Express Install Files

[Phil Wilcock]

Yep, seems to be an acknowledged issue. Seems the range requests are not quite 
right in some way which is resulting in slow downloads..
Couple of similar stories on Technet forums too so you are not alone 



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Enley, Carl
Sent: 16 May 2017 15:11
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] 1702 Express Install Files

Is anyone using this feature in SCCM 1702? I was really looking forward to 
getting this up and running after the 1702 upgrade but I am a little 
disappointed with the results I am seeing.

I understand the initial download is larger and I am okay with that, my patch 
package jumped from 13.1GB to nearly 44GB so the 2-3X size increase was pretty 
accurate. My issue is the time that it is taking to install the cumulative 
update, it is taking almost 3+ hours on my test machines. The machines are all 
W10 1607 with the latest April update applied, everything in the log files 
(deltadownload.log) indicates all is well and they are using the express files 
to install. It just takes forever to apply the update.

Is anyone else experiencing very long install times using the express install 
files? I am going to test a 1703 machine today to see if it makes any 
difference.

Thanks
Carl

RE: [mssms] CM 1511 auto-upgrading clients

[Phil Wilcock]

You do realise 1511 is only supported until Dec 8th right?

https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/configurationmgr/2016/11/03/support-for-version-1511-of-the-current-branch-of-microsoft-system-center-configuration-manager-ending-soon/

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of the codepoets
Sent: 03 November 2016 22:22
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] CM 1511 auto-upgrading clients

So, I just recently finished our upgrade to 1511 (infrastructure only) in both 
our PROD and DEV environments. We had no plans to upgrade the clients until a 
later date.

But now I am seeing that clients (servers and desktops) are being upgraded 
automatically. I have already checked the Client Upgrade option in the 
Hierarchy Settings, and both the Production and Pre-Production checkboxes are 
clear.

We do not have any deployments (that I can at least see) that would be pushing 
this out.

Anyone have any other clue as to why my clients are auto-upgrading themselves 
when they definitely should not be?

Thanks,
Erik

RE: [mssms] Horrible food at Ignite

[Phil Wilcock]

Isn’t it ‘Buy One Get One Free’ day tomorrow? ;-)

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Roland Janus
Sent: 29 September 2016 23:24
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: AW: [mssms] Horrible food at Ignite

Andreas,

I’m going to attend your session, ready to hand out the branchcache tool? ☺



Von: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] Im Auftrag von Andreas Hammarskjöld
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 19:33
An: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Betreff: RE: [mssms] Horrible food at Ignite

Pretty sure the content of session is not going to be an “approved message” 
from marketing. ☺ There are plenty of 400 level sessions here as well, but as 
there are so much of it looks like % wise small.

As per Windows is concerned, Windows 10 is the best OS ever come out of 
Redmond. Or do you want Windows XP back? So I could argute that going to MMS 
year and year to listen to what might ship at some time in the future was 
getting pretty boring as well…

So pretty impressed by Ignite, and I wasn’t a fanboy before. But to compare 
against ITDevCon or MMSMOA is impossible, very different events.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell
Sent: den 29 september 2016 13:00
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] Horrible food at Ignite

"So, the bigger the event, the worse the quality?"
No only in food, but also in quality of content and the depth of the content. 
The only people big events like that work out for are vendors and Microsoft.
MS employees have to take off less time from work to go to the event.
Marketing can plan everything for a single event. They prep the slide decks in 
advance and then decide you will read them. It is just marketing content and 
you are basically a fool if you paid for it.
This is all about being good for Microsoft, not the customer. They stopped 
caring about the customer a long time ago. Now it is all about recurring 
payments and their bottom line.
You see this with support, big fixes (or lack thereof), crappy events, missing 
kb articles, and a push towards the cloud and recurring payments. Even the way 
they fix their broken products is now being driven by what is best for them 
(monolithic updates)
They got rid of the solution accelerator team because they no longer care about 
adding value to their products, they just care about their bottom line and 
trying to be apple.
Their enterprise operating system even pushes down advertising against your 
will.
Just blows my mind anyone would give them money to listen to that marketing 
speak.
Obviously the same people that would pay for "Cloud"


On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Roland Janus 
> wrote:
To sum that up:

MS doesn’t safe any money, which is sad by itself, lunchboxes costing the same 
as “real” food.
It’s cold and while it may be fresh, it’s mostly tasteless and just horrible 
IMO.

And all that because waiting in line for 5 minutes is to long? I never had to 
wait longer and certainly not 20-30 minutes.
While waiting at the restroom, at least for guys ☺, may take even longer?

So, the bigger the event, the worse the quality?
That’s just sad.

Cheers, roland


Von: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] 
Im Auftrag von Adam Juelich
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 16:57
An: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Betreff: Re: [mssms] Horrible food at Ignite

All of this talk about 'severed' food is freaking me out a bit



On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Heaton, Joseph@Wildlife 
> wrote:
Mmm, peach cobbler.  I’d be happy to take yours off your hands, Garth, since 
you’re watching your weight. ;)

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] 
On Behalf Of Garth Jones
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 3:39 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] Horrible food at Ignite

I’m just providing the details that I was told as to why we have lunch boxes vs 
hot food. Like you I prefer hot food but it does mean that you have to wait in 
line to be severed.

This question was not who wanted lunch boxes, the issue was how long it took to 
be severed. Even thought I go to the vendor food hall, it always seen to take 5 
minutes before you could make it to the food table before getting severed. Then 
it would take a bit longer to slowly make you way to the other end. If anything 
ran out you would wait until 

[mssms] RE: 2012 and Current Branch - no need for secondary or child sites ?

[Phil Wilcock]

I would agree that Peer Cache isn’t ready for prime time – seem to be little 
movement on that feature currently and it’s a long way off useful even in the 
current TP.

In the meantime – good ol’ BranchCache keeps chugging away ☺ Lots of people 
using it today to save many Gb of WAN content transfer, and SCCM CB makes it 
easy to configure now with the addition of BranchCache settings in the Client 
Settings.

MS are keen on pushing P2P as a solution for mitigating large content 
transfers, especially in light of the new Win 7/8/10 CU approach. Expect new 
content soon and sessions at Ignite providing more guidance!

I think in the future Delivery Optimization looks promising and will provide 
additional heavy lifting in the enterprise sphere too.

We always recommend running some tests first – but once setup, BranchCache just 
works..

Cheers

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 15 September 2016 23:32
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: 2012 and Current Branch - no need for secondary or child 
sites ?

I don’t have any hard and fast numbers and would never give them as there 
simply are too many factors involved. As noted, it comes down to client count 
at a location along with bandwidth to a location. Package size doesn’t ever 
really come into play necessarily IMO. Sometimes, simple logistics are the 
determining factor well as in “do we even have anywhere secure to put a DP?” 
For small locations without any P2P in use, I’d say 5-10 is probably the max 
I’d ever recommend without a DP though.

The 2Pint guys (among others) would (or will) loudly disagree with you on P2P 
using BranchCache.

PeerCache will make its debut sooner or later but I don’t see why it won’t be 
ready for prime time.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Chramosta, Steven C.
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 4:31 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: 2012 and Current Branch - no need for secondary or child 
sites ?

What are your recommendations for justifying a distribution Point?  WAN link - 
# clients – Package sizes?  I’m not convinced peer-to-peer distribution is 
ready for prime time in SCCM CB.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 2:32 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: 2012 and Current Branch - no need for secondary or child 
sites ?

**WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links 
or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender.

Don’t get caught on those numbers – without knowing how much actual bandwidth 
there is, those numbers are meaningless; e.g., if I have a 10GB link to a 
location, then supporting 7,500 clients with just a DP is totally plausible or 
if I have a 512KB link then a secondary site for just 100 clients is also 
justifiable. Additionally, the maximum number of clients for a supported 
secondary site went up in CB (to 15,000 I believe).

Secondary sites are not gateways either so using them across firewalls is 
problematic at best – you must be able to guarantee that clients can 
communicate with an MP in the primary site – always.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Burke, John
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 2:08 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: 2012 and Current Branch - no need for secondary or child 
sites ?

Yeah in the past we also used secondary sites to avoid all the fighting of 
dealing with multiple firewalls too.


This is generally how I used to think about it at least.  It’s basically how 
I’ve always designed our setup over the years.

Decision Factors for Placing Secondary Sites
While I have said that no network is the same (which it isn’t), I do have some 
standard design rules I stick to when I am designing hierarchies. These rules 
are fairly simple:-

  *   Remote locations have more than 500 clients and less than 5,000 clients
  *   I need to compress traffic going to the site
  *   I need to control the traffic flowing up
  *   I need a local management point
  *   I need a local software update point
I just want to look at these a bit deeper to explain. These rules are pretty 
much identical to those of Kent 
Agerlund
 (awesome MVP), they are like this because they have worked for me the 

[mssms] RE: Current Branch Planning - 400 slow connected stores

[Phil Wilcock]

BranchCache, teamed with DeDupe on the server side is pretty industrial 
strength these days. Lots of places using it successfully over many sites and 
clients. Even BranchCache V1 (Win7 WS2008) can cut it.

If your 20Gb package has a lot of common content then dedupe will reduce the 
amount you even need to transfer to those remote sites.

You need at least WS2012 + Win8 on the client for the dedupe advantage though.

I would test BranchCache out at least - you already own it :)

Phil



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Burke, John
Sent: 25 August 2016 15:34
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Current Branch Planning - 400 slow connected stores

Hi Folks,

I'm wondering what folks think about branch cache for dealing with these poorly 
connected locations.  They apparently get massive packages that need to  go in 
1 night of 20 GB.  There are about 1500 systems at these locations in total.

I was going to look into 1e nomad, but wondering if I could get away with 
branch cache.  Thoughts?

FYI - currently they get a drive mailed to them and copy it manually to 1 
system then they either manually do it, or copy it  1 by 1.

[mssms] RE: Microsoft set to change Windows patching in a disasterous way

[Phil Wilcock]

This was such a great thread, we decided to make it into a BoF session at ITDev 
Connections :)

http://www.itdevconnections.com/dc16/Public/SessionDetails.aspx?FromPage=Sessions.aspx=1016760=1000991


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Miller, Todd
Sent: 15 August 2016 21:42
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Microsoft set to change Windows patching in a disasterous way

https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/windowsitpro/2016/08/15/further-simplifying-servicing-model-for-windows-7-and-windows-8-1/

Wow, this could be a disaster.

We have had 4 or 5 cases in the last 12 months where we have had to delay the 
installation of a security update so that applications could be modified to 
work with updates.  In a couple of cases, one ongoing, Microsoft has released a 
security update, then acknowledged a bug in that update and released a fix 
several months later.  We currently have KB3170455 denied in our environment 
because it breaks point - and -print driver installation.  In the new world, I 
will need to decide which is worse - no security updates for 3 months, or break 
printing for all non-admin users.  Currently I can decide to pull or hold an 
individual patch, but it looks like that option is being removed from Windows 7 
and 8. This comes at a time where it seems like patch quality has hit a 
rough patch, making this decision more troubling.


Notice: This UI Health Care e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the 
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is intended only 
for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may 
contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly 
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the 
sender immediately and delete or destroy all copies of the original message and 
attachments thereto. Email sent to or from UI Health Care may be retained as 
required by law or regulation. Thank you.

RE: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround using Branchcache?

[Phil Wilcock]

I got it straight away? Just sayin...

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 10 August 2016 11:00
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround 
using Branchcache?

Replied to this in the morning, about three hours ago, but it hasn't come 
through yet, making another attempt. Rod really needs to fix this list.

---
Well that is just the PowerShell cmdlets. The API's are there. We got an 
executable that allows you to do the same, not released though. Thought all 
people were on Windows 10 by now. ;-)

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Roland Janus
Sent: den 10 augusti 2016 00:15
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: AW: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround 
using Branchcache?

All would be mood if I there is no way to do that on Win7.
There isn't?
I mean after all that cmdlet makes it simple, but maybe it can be simulated 
with more code?

-roland



Von: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] Im Auftrag von Phil Wilcock
Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. August 2016 15:11
An: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Betreff: RE: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround 
using Branchcache?

What's your actual command line for publish-bcwebcontent?

You need to point it at the actual content not the BC cache folders...

You can't import on Win7. All this cool stuff only exists on Win 8 or above

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Roland Janus
Sent: 09 August 2016 08:55
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround using 
Branchcache?

I guess not many use Prestage media, otherwise it would have been noticed that 
content usage of applications is broken since 1511 (up to 1606).
Basically, while the content is there it isn't used and everything downloaded 
anyway
I've opened a case with 1511 and it was confirmed and that a fix doesn't make 
it in 1606.

Does anyone know about this or any planned fixes?

Since it's broken I was looking for an alternative solution (or workaround): 
Branchcache.

I've brought this up in the past and Andreas helped (kind of :) ), now I'd like 
to actually do this:


· Export all BC content from the server

· Create a package and have it applied during OSD before applications 
are used (which does work for prestage)

· When the content is requested, local BC is used.

When this was discussed before it was basically about that:

http://2pintsoftware.com/2psfaqs/branchcache-caching-faq/

But I don't get it.

On The Server

1.Stage the Content
Publish-BCWebContent -Path c:\inetpub\wwwroot\MyBigWIMFile.WIM -StageData 
-StagingPath c:\temp
That is throwing an error: ObjectNotFound.
Isn't that where the content is:
PS U:\> dir C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistPub


Directory: 
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistPub


ModeLastWriteTime Length Name
- -- 
d17.06.2015 13:53PrimaryHashStore
d17.06.2015 13:53TempHashStore
-a---09.08.2016 00:08   8192 edb.chk
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edb.log
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edbres1.jrs
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edbres2.jrs
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edbtmp.log
-a---09.08.2016 00:088454144 PeerDistPubCatalog.pds


PS U:\> dir 
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistRepub


Directory: 
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistRepub


ModeLastWriteTime Length Name
- -- 
d17.06.2015 13:53Store
-a---30.07.2016 02:46   8192 edb.chk
-a---30.07.2016 02:465242880 edb.log
-a---17.06.2015 13:535242880 edbres1.jrs
-a---17.06.2015 13:535242880 edbres2.jrs
-a---17.06.2015 16:095242880 edbtmp.log
-a---30.07.2016 02:478454144 PeerDistRepubStoreCatalog.pds

How do I export that content then?
2. Export the content to a package (creates a handy .zip file)
Export-BCCachePackage -StagingPath c:\temp -Destination c:\MyBCPackage
That would work once 1 works?
On The Client
1.Import the Package Created in Step 2 Above
Import-BCCachePackage -Path C:\temp\pkg\PeerDistPackage.zip
An

RE: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround using Branchcache?

[Phil Wilcock]

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jay Marsett
Sent: 09 August 2016 20:27
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround 
using Branchcache?

Phil,

Are you saying the "publish-bcwebcontent" command line would be run against the 
content library itself through the web interface of the DP?
Yup, it needs to run against the content that it’s going to stage.

Wouldn't it have to be the DP that these clients would be checking the BC hash 
against?
Nope, your DP’s should all have the same server secret – ConfigMgr takes care 
of that providing you use ConfigMgr to configure BranchCache.

 And wouldn't a successful deployment using the branchcache option be needed 
first, to create the hashes for the content that you would be "manually 
caching".
The hashes get created during the staging process.


Do you have to do a piece of content at a time if you were caching it this way? 
How could you do this in batches for large amounts of content from the library?
Up to you how you do it – but yes, tricky due to the way that ConfigMgr 
abstracts the actual content. It would be kind of all or nothing..i.e you’d 
have to point to the root of the Content Library and grab the whole thing.  OR 
if you have the content source on a BranchCache-enabled server, you could run 
the staging command against that – providing it has the same server secret as 
the DPs, then you  could do it easily on a package by package basis if required.

Still this might be better than deploying the content to get it into the cache 
for any static content.  Also toyed with deployment availability and deadlines 
far far into the future to stage the branchcache, but haven't seen that work at 
scale yet.  Other thought I had was to use offline media task sequence 
deployments to stage the content on branchcache/WinPE peercache peers, but I 
have no idea if that is supported, or if it would work.

Jay


On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 8:10 AM, Phil Wilcock 
<ph...@2pintsoftware.com<mailto:ph...@2pintsoftware.com>> wrote:
What’s your actual command line for publish-bcwebcontent?

You need to point it at the actual content not the BC cache folders…

You can’t import on Win7. All this cool stuff only exists on Win 8 or above

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Roland Janus
Sent: 09 August 2016 08:55
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround using 
Branchcache?

I guess not many use Prestage media, otherwise it would have been noticed that 
content usage of applications is broken since 1511 (up to 1606).
Basically, while the content is there it isn’t used and everything downloaded 
anyway
I’ve opened a case with 1511 and it was confirmed and that a fix doesn’t make 
it in 1606.

Does anyone know about this or any planned fixes?

Since it’s broken I was looking for an alternative solution (or workaround): 
Branchcache.

I’ve brought this up in the past and Andreas helped (kind of ☺ ), now I’d like 
to actually do this:


• Export all BC content from the server

• Create a package and have it applied during OSD before applications 
are used (which does work for prestage)

• When the content is requested, local BC is used.

When this was discussed before it was basically about that:

http://2pintsoftware.com/2psfaqs/branchcache-caching-faq/

But I don’t get it.

On The Server

1.Stage the Content
Publish-BCWebContent -Path c:\inetpub\wwwroot\MyBigWIMFile.WIM -StageData 
-StagingPath c:\temp
That is throwing an error: ObjectNotFound.
Isn’t that where the content is:
PS U:\> dir C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistPub


Directory: 
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistPub


ModeLastWriteTime Length Name
- -- 
d17.06.2015 13:53PrimaryHashStore
d17.06.2015 13:53TempHashStore
-a---09.08.2016 00:08   8192 edb.chk
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edb.log
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edbres1.jrs
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edbres2.jrs
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edbtmp.log
-a---09.08.2016 00:088454144 PeerDistPubCatalog.pds


PS U:\> dir 
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistRepub


Directory: 
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistRepub


ModeLastWriteTime Length Name
- -- 
d17.06.2015 13:53Store
-a---30.07.2016 02

RE: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround using Branchcache?

[Phil Wilcock]

What's your actual command line for publish-bcwebcontent?

You need to point it at the actual content not the BC cache folders...

You can't import on Win7. All this cool stuff only exists on Win 8 or above

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Roland Janus
Sent: 09 August 2016 08:55
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround using 
Branchcache?

I guess not many use Prestage media, otherwise it would have been noticed that 
content usage of applications is broken since 1511 (up to 1606).
Basically, while the content is there it isn't used and everything downloaded 
anyway
I've opened a case with 1511 and it was confirmed and that a fix doesn't make 
it in 1606.

Does anyone know about this or any planned fixes?

Since it's broken I was looking for an alternative solution (or workaround): 
Branchcache.

I've brought this up in the past and Andreas helped (kind of :) ), now I'd like 
to actually do this:


* Export all BC content from the server

* Create a package and have it applied during OSD before applications 
are used (which does work for prestage)

* When the content is requested, local BC is used.

When this was discussed before it was basically about that:

http://2pintsoftware.com/2psfaqs/branchcache-caching-faq/

But I don't get it.

On The Server

1.Stage the Content
Publish-BCWebContent -Path c:\inetpub\wwwroot\MyBigWIMFile.WIM -StageData 
-StagingPath c:\temp
That is throwing an error: ObjectNotFound.
Isn't that where the content is:
PS U:\> dir C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistPub


Directory: 
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistPub


ModeLastWriteTime Length Name
- -- 
d17.06.2015 13:53PrimaryHashStore
d17.06.2015 13:53TempHashStore
-a---09.08.2016 00:08   8192 edb.chk
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edb.log
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edbres1.jrs
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edbres2.jrs
-a---09.08.2016 00:085242880 edbtmp.log
-a---09.08.2016 00:088454144 PeerDistPubCatalog.pds


PS U:\> dir 
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistRepub


Directory: 
C:\Windows\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Local\PeerDistRepub


ModeLastWriteTime Length Name
- -- 
d17.06.2015 13:53Store
-a---30.07.2016 02:46   8192 edb.chk
-a---30.07.2016 02:465242880 edb.log
-a---17.06.2015 13:535242880 edbres1.jrs
-a---17.06.2015 13:535242880 edbres2.jrs
-a---17.06.2015 16:095242880 edbtmp.log
-a---30.07.2016 02:478454144 PeerDistRepubStoreCatalog.pds

How do I export that content then?
2. Export the content to a package (creates a handy .zip file)
Export-BCCachePackage -StagingPath c:\temp -Destination c:\MyBCPackage
That would work once 1 works?
On The Client
1.Import the Package Created in Step 2 Above
Import-BCCachePackage -Path C:\temp\pkg\PeerDistPackage.zip
And on Win 7?
..And you're done! The content and is in the client cache ready for access by 
other computers, and the hashes are on the server (they get generated during 
the Staging part).

cheers, Roland

RE: [External] [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now

[Phil Wilcock]

This just in via Twitter.. There might be an issue in the fast ring going from 
1511 -> 1606 apparently… hold for further info!



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 25 July 2016 19:52
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [External] [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now

Are you sure it’s not installed already?

Re-running the script btw won’t change anything – all that the script does is 
flip a value in the site control file.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Linkey, Mike
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 11:31 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [External] [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now

Yep several times in fact.  It was there Friday, but gone today.  I see this in 
the hman.log file

Configuration Manager Update (PackageGuid=705820EF-6982-4417-8E54-307454C9A17A) 
is not applicable and should be filtered.

Don’t get why it says it is not applicable especially since I have ran that 
script at least 6 times again today.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 9:48 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [External] [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now

No. Did you run the PowerShell script to opt in to the fast ring?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Linkey, Mike
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 8:04 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [External] [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now

I saw this was available on Friday before I left.  Today, it is no longer an 
option for Updating.  Did it get pulled?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Brian Illner
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 11:40 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [External] [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now


[https://abs.twimg.com/sticky/default_profile_images/default_profile_6_normal.png]

david james (@djammmer)

7/22/16, 12:01 PM
#ConfigMgr 1606 current branch 
available now, for everyone. Opt into fast ring to get it immediately. 
blogs.technet.microsoft.com/enterprisemobi…



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The e-mail transmission (and/or the documents 
accompanying such) may contain confidential information. Such information is 
intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are 
not the named or intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on 
the contents of such information is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this email in error, please notify the sender and then delete the email. Thank 
you for your cooperation.


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The e-mail transmission (and/or the documents 
accompanying such) may contain confidential information. Such information is 
intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are 
not the named or intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on 
the contents of such information is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this email in error, please notify the sender and then delete the email. Thank 
you for your cooperation.

RE: [mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited

[Phil Wilcock]

Just tested this in 1606, and for User launched Applications, the BITS job is 
still created as FOREGROUND (or Hell for Leather as we like to call it) 
priority…

User launched Package/Programs however come with a BITS priority of LOW – much 
more sensible.

Created a UserVoice item for this – so feel free to vote your asses off..

https://configurationmanager.uservoice.com/forums/300492-ideas/suggestions/15351201-bits-priorities-for-user-initiated-deployments

Easy fix for them ConfigMgr folks ☺

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 22 July 2016 08:28
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited

1602 you say, haven’t tested with Apps, could be that they forgot to reset 
that. So maybe the good ol’ (not RTM yet) does have a fix for you.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jay Marsett
Sent: den 22 juli 2016 01:07
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited


Phil,

So far all of our testing is with Windows 7, as that is 9/10ths of the current 
system footprint.  We do have the "goldilocks" patches for bits in win 7 
applied in the test images.

We are also using the GPO based Bits policy, I believe using the "win7" bits 
version policy, but will double check tomorrow. We also have the "ignore" 
policies for subnet transfers, in the gpo. Definitely not using configmgr based 
Bits policy.

Will try what you suggested about testing the branchcach via IE from our 
troubled system, was not something that had occurred to me.

Thanks again everybody.
On Jul 21, 2016 17:53, "Phil Wilcock" 
<ph...@2pintsoftware.com<mailto:ph...@2pintsoftware.com>> wrote:
Pretty sure that the Foreground issue was fixed in Current Branch.

Also relevant is the OS version and the type of policy that you are using – if 
Win7 there are a couple of hotfixes that you need that stop BITS from ignoring 
policy, and even in Win10 there were still some minor bugs until recent builds 
affecting BITS policy. Using the built-in ConfigMgr policy is not as effective 
as using the newer policies for Work and Maintenance schedules, which also 
allow you to specify that peer transfers using BranchCache ignore the rate 
limits if on the same subnet..

Regarding the machine that’s going back to the DP – check the BITS log for 
errors, and try to grab the same content using IE and see if BranchCache 
behaves the same.

Phil



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Jay Marsett
Sent: 21 July 2016 18:57

To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited

Finally have some real feedback about BranchCache and BITS.  Got our site built 
and began unit testing, What we found so far;

1. Seems like all Package and Program downloads are BITS background transfers, 
so they follow rate limits, however, User initiated Application downloads STILL 
happen in the foreground.  Anyone seen any documentation that explains that?

2. Seeing a single test machine that randomly seems to have issues as large 
transfers from Branchcache are occuring.  The system becomes unstable, freezes 
as the hybrid drive software (lenovo expresscache) seems to peg the HD, as this 
is occuring, the transfer from cache seems to stop, and it begins to transfer 
from the DP.  Then randomly, back to the BranchCache.  Seems to happen with any 
type of "Cacheable" content, but only user initiated Application installs seem 
to ignore the BITS rate limits. Anyone seen this behavior?  Have any 
documentation that can explain it?

We haven't yet debugged the problem laptop yet, but theoretically, all of our 
test systems are identical.

Long story short, it makes it impossible to use self service with the 
AppCatalog if we can't reasonably plan for when this type of issue might occur 
in this BranchCache with BITS model.  If all Application based pushes need to 
be background, we can't use self service.

Please let me know your thoughts.

RE: [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now

[Phil Wilcock]

Yep, looks like it didn’t make 1606 – which doesn’t mean that it’s been canned, 
just that it’s not ready from prime time perhaps..

I think there’s a new TP coming soon so maybe it will still be in there

Looking at 1606 later today in more detail!

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 23 July 2016 15:02
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now

Not in CB 1606 I been told. Phil might know more? Is BranchCache for Policy 
working yet?

Our free BITS-BC reporting will show you more data than the built in though, so 
might be an option.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jay Marsett
Sent: den 22 juli 2016 23:44
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now


Where is the client data sources dashboard we were promised in 1605? Am I not 
wAiting long enough for something, or did it not make it to RTM.
On Jul 22, 2016 11:46 AM, "Brian Illner" 
> wrote:

[https://abs.twimg.com/sticky/default_profile_images/default_profile_6_normal.png]

david james (@djammmer)

7/22/16, 12:01 PM
#ConfigMgr 1606 current branch 
available now, for everyone. Opt into fast ring to get it immediately. 
blogs.technet.microsoft.com/enterprisemobi…

RE: [mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited

[Phil Wilcock]

Pretty sure that the Foreground issue was fixed in Current Branch.

Also relevant is the OS version and the type of policy that you are using – if 
Win7 there are a couple of hotfixes that you need that stop BITS from ignoring 
policy, and even in Win10 there were still some minor bugs until recent builds 
affecting BITS policy. Using the built-in ConfigMgr policy is not as effective 
as using the newer policies for Work and Maintenance schedules, which also 
allow you to specify that peer transfers using BranchCache ignore the rate 
limits if on the same subnet..

Regarding the machine that’s going back to the DP – check the BITS log for 
errors, and try to grab the same content using IE and see if BranchCache 
behaves the same.

Phil



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jay Marsett
Sent: 21 July 2016 18:57
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited

Finally have some real feedback about BranchCache and BITS.  Got our site built 
and began unit testing, What we found so far;

1. Seems like all Package and Program downloads are BITS background transfers, 
so they follow rate limits, however, User initiated Application downloads STILL 
happen in the foreground.  Anyone seen any documentation that explains that?

2. Seeing a single test machine that randomly seems to have issues as large 
transfers from Branchcache are occuring.  The system becomes unstable, freezes 
as the hybrid drive software (lenovo expresscache) seems to peg the HD, as this 
is occuring, the transfer from cache seems to stop, and it begins to transfer 
from the DP.  Then randomly, back to the BranchCache.  Seems to happen with any 
type of "Cacheable" content, but only user initiated Application installs seem 
to ignore the BITS rate limits. Anyone seen this behavior?  Have any 
documentation that can explain it?

We haven't yet debugged the problem laptop yet, but theoretically, all of our 
test systems are identical.

Long story short, it makes it impossible to use self service with the 
AppCatalog if we can't reasonably plan for when this type of issue might occur 
in this BranchCache with BITS model.  If all Application based pushes need to 
be background, we can't use self service.

Please let me know your thoughts.

RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

[Phil Wilcock]

Yep you can’t dedupe the content source, but then why would you..

Blog by Johan on the subject.. 
http://deploymentresearch.com/Research/Post/409/Using-Data-DeDuplication-with-ConfigMgr-2012-R2

When enabled, content is DeDuplicated BEFORE the WAN transfer – really powerful 
if you have content with a lot of similar blocks of data – Updates, Drivers, 
WIMs etc, or Packages/Apps that change slightly with each new version (like 
definition files etc) – so ConfigMgr with BITS and BranchCache only has to 
transfer the common data blocks over the network.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Roland Janus
Sent: 30 June 2016 23:43
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: AW: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

Isn’t there an issue or “not supported” statement about de-dupe for the DP?

-R


Von: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] Im Auftrag von Phil Wilcock
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. Juni 2016 09:08
An: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Betreff: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

In Current Branch  fairly sure FOREGROUND is no longer used. Previously it was 
the default for user initiated downloads.

Policy wise – you should use the ‘Setup a Work Schedule’ and ‘Setup a 
Maintenance Schedule’ GPOs

You MUST enable the checkbox in the Work schedule that says ‘Ignore Bandwidth 
limits if source and destination are on the same subnet’. Otherwise local 
BranchCache transfers will happen at the throttled rate.

Also if you are on Win7 you need to make sure that you have 
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2863374  or  BITS sometimes stops caring 
about Policy and goes full speed

When setting a speed over 2048 Kbit/s set the policy to use Mb instead of Kb.

Finally, always enabled DeDupe on the DP – DeDupe + BranchCache rules!

Cheers

Senior

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 29 June 2016 06:18
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

Think even FOREGROUND is gone after 2 BITS supporters ranted about it… Senior 
can you confirm?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: den 29 juni 2016 01:40
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

You sure about this one. Isn’t it foreground if user initiated, background for 
deadline initiated?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Michael Niehaus
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 3:12 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

There are two BITS bandwidth policies, one for content retrieved from the 
server and another for content retrieved from a peer.  Limiting the server 
traffic is fine, but you’ll want the peer traffic to run at higher speed, since 
it doesn’t impact the rest of the network (just on that one segment).

Also note that these BITS policies only apply to background transfers, not 
foreground ones.  ConfigMgr “required” deployments use foreground BITS jobs, 
while “available” deployments use background BITS jobs.

Thanks,
-Michael

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jay Marsett
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 2:44 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

So much great feedback!

We were contemplating utilizing a pretty slow footprint for BITS policy, 1-2MB 
let's say, across the board, and then narrow that bandwidth further using 
networking equipment, where appropriate.  Anyone else doing something similar?

Thanks

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:29 AM, David Jones 
<dkjones9...@gmail.com<mailto:dkjones9...@gmail.com>> wrote:

6am-6pm 2mb, full at night
On Jun 28, 2016 9:50 AM, "Jimmy Martin" 
<jimmy.mar...@bmhcc.org<mailto:jimmy.mar...@bmhcc.org>> wrote:
I know it’s highly dependent on underlying network capabilities, but what do 
you (collective you) use for your bits transfer rate settings?


Jimmy Martin
(901) 227-8209<tel:%28901%29%20227-8209>
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of David Jones
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 2:00 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [m

RE: [External] RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

[Phil Wilcock]

Yeah, what Daddy bear said ☺


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Bradley, Matt
Sent: 29 June 2016 14:32
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [External] RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

Don’t forget the other Win7 BITS hotfix that fixes it if it goes too slow.  
It’s the Goldilocks combo…one is too fast, the other is too slow, but the one 
after the patches is juuust right.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2732072

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 2:08 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [External] RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

In Current Branch  fairly sure FOREGROUND is no longer used. Previously it was 
the default for user initiated downloads.

Policy wise – you should use the ‘Setup a Work Schedule’ and ‘Setup a 
Maintenance Schedule’ GPOs

You MUST enable the checkbox in the Work schedule that says ‘Ignore Bandwidth 
limits if source and destination are on the same subnet’. Otherwise local 
BranchCache transfers will happen at the throttled rate.

Also if you are on Win7 you need to make sure that you have 
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2863374  or  BITS sometimes stops caring 
about Policy and goes full speed

When setting a speed over 2048 Kbit/s set the policy to use Mb instead of Kb.

Finally, always enabled DeDupe on the DP – DeDupe + BranchCache rules!

Cheers

Senior

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 29 June 2016 06:18
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

Think even FOREGROUND is gone after 2 BITS supporters ranted about it… Senior 
can you confirm?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: den 29 juni 2016 01:40
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

You sure about this one. Isn’t it foreground if user initiated, background for 
deadline initiated?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Michael Niehaus
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 3:12 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

There are two BITS bandwidth policies, one for content retrieved from the 
server and another for content retrieved from a peer.  Limiting the server 
traffic is fine, but you’ll want the peer traffic to run at higher speed, since 
it doesn’t impact the rest of the network (just on that one segment).

Also note that these BITS policies only apply to background transfers, not 
foreground ones.  ConfigMgr “required” deployments use foreground BITS jobs, 
while “available” deployments use background BITS jobs.

Thanks,
-Michael

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jay Marsett
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 2:44 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

So much great feedback!

We were contemplating utilizing a pretty slow footprint for BITS policy, 1-2MB 
let's say, across the board, and then narrow that bandwidth further using 
networking equipment, where appropriate.  Anyone else doing something similar?

Thanks

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:29 AM, David Jones 
<dkjones9...@gmail.com<mailto:dkjones9...@gmail.com>> wrote:

6am-6pm 2mb, full at night
On Jun 28, 2016 9:50 AM, "Jimmy Martin" 
<jimmy.mar...@bmhcc.org<mailto:jimmy.mar...@bmhcc.org>> wrote:
I know it’s highly dependent on underlying network capabilities, but what do 
you (collective you) use for your bits transfer rate settings?


Jimmy Martin
(901) 227-8209<tel:%28901%29%20227-8209>
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of David Jones
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 2:00 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

That is exactly what we do. 35000 clients. Have had no complaints. But what 
does that mean in the big scheme? You could right click any client in the local 
network of all the sites and make them a DP. We were doing before Branchcache.

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Phil Wilcock 
<ph...@2pint

RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

[Phil Wilcock]

In Current Branch  fairly sure FOREGROUND is no longer used. Previously it was 
the default for user initiated downloads.

Policy wise – you should use the ‘Setup a Work Schedule’ and ‘Setup a 
Maintenance Schedule’ GPOs

You MUST enable the checkbox in the Work schedule that says ‘Ignore Bandwidth 
limits if source and destination are on the same subnet’. Otherwise local 
BranchCache transfers will happen at the throttled rate.

Also if you are on Win7 you need to make sure that you have 
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2863374  or  BITS sometimes stops caring 
about Policy and goes full speed

When setting a speed over 2048 Kbit/s set the policy to use Mb instead of Kb.

Finally, always enabled DeDupe on the DP – DeDupe + BranchCache rules!

Cheers

Senior

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 29 June 2016 06:18
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

Think even FOREGROUND is gone after 2 BITS supporters ranted about it… Senior 
can you confirm?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: den 29 juni 2016 01:40
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

You sure about this one. Isn’t it foreground if user initiated, background for 
deadline initiated?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Michael Niehaus
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 3:12 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

There are two BITS bandwidth policies, one for content retrieved from the 
server and another for content retrieved from a peer.  Limiting the server 
traffic is fine, but you’ll want the peer traffic to run at higher speed, since 
it doesn’t impact the rest of the network (just on that one segment).

Also note that these BITS policies only apply to background transfers, not 
foreground ones.  ConfigMgr “required” deployments use foreground BITS jobs, 
while “available” deployments use background BITS jobs.

Thanks,
-Michael

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jay Marsett
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 2:44 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

So much great feedback!

We were contemplating utilizing a pretty slow footprint for BITS policy, 1-2MB 
let's say, across the board, and then narrow that bandwidth further using 
networking equipment, where appropriate.  Anyone else doing something similar?

Thanks

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:29 AM, David Jones 
<dkjones9...@gmail.com<mailto:dkjones9...@gmail.com>> wrote:

6am-6pm 2mb, full at night
On Jun 28, 2016 9:50 AM, "Jimmy Martin" 
<jimmy.mar...@bmhcc.org<mailto:jimmy.mar...@bmhcc.org>> wrote:
I know it’s highly dependent on underlying network capabilities, but what do 
you (collective you) use for your bits transfer rate settings?


Jimmy Martin
(901) 227-8209<tel:%28901%29%20227-8209>
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of David Jones
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 2:00 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

That is exactly what we do. 35000 clients. Have had no complaints. But what 
does that mean in the big scheme? You could right click any client in the local 
network of all the sites and make them a DP. We were doing before Branchcache.

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Phil Wilcock 
<ph...@2pintsoftware.com<mailto:ph...@2pintsoftware.com>> wrote:
Works fine, PRO is supported and always has been, just do it!

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/mt613461.aspx#bkmk_os<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__technet.microsoft.com_en-2Dus_library_mt613461.aspx-23bkmk-5Fos=CwMFaQ=NwimJEPcMuFfAJV6iz0C4Q=fmX3K5VcrxX3Cfd4TmGGXvjAEVAsqB03O3gvuJE7gdY=r3MqgjQbNaYBffhV9c4ZN1l8D71UW1K8VXyn98_vBuc=aaV0wGpEWTXQkjS3O8EweUKdXVAvp46WXQJTCY8bmW8=>

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Jay Parekh
Sent: 24 June 2016 14:45
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

Posting for my colleague.  Some reason he's post here is not coming through.

Basically c

RE: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

[Phil Wilcock]

Works fine, PRO is supported and always has been, just do it!

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/mt613461.aspx#bkmk_os

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jay Parekh
Sent: 24 June 2016 14:45
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

Posting for my colleague.  Some reason he's post here is not coming through.

Basically comes down to a client is looking to deploy a net new SCCM 
environment.  They have 400 sites but the CTO doesn't want servers (DPs) at the 
sites and he will not pay for Nomad or OneSite.  Also they are running Win 7 
Pro on the client side.  They want to see if anyone has tried a large CM 
deployment without local DPs and just utilizing BranchCache/BITs.


Hey guys,

wanted to ask a couple of questions about what we are seeing in the field with 
BranchCache, ConfigMgr and the PRO SKU of Windows.

It is my understanding that Windows PRO editions can be configured to utilize 
BranchCache in a BITS only operating mode (which seems to be fine for 
Configuration Manager); my questions,

1. Are we seeing it appear much in the field?  Are many of you using 
BranchCache in mixed Pro and Enterprise SKU environments, or PRO SKU only 
environments?

2. And more importantly, is it supportable?  E.G., Will Microsoft validate and 
support a configuration that intentionally utilizes this seeming hole in the 
"BranchCache is an Enterprise feature" conundrum?

[mssms] RE: SCCM 2012 R2 and PXE boot

[Phil Wilcock]

..and if you don't like reading, or just plain can't be bothered - Junior did a 
movie as well!

Describes the problem and fix/workaround quite nicely. Bear in mind that your 
DHCP server needs to be WS2012 for this to work..

Using DHCP to Boot WDS BIOS  UEFI

https://youtu.be/k5E97ndlRog

cheers

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 17 March 2015 15:09
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: SCCM 2012 R2 and PXE boot

A little white paper on the subject, more posts coming the coming days:

http://2pintsoftware.com/new-whitepaper-using-dhcp-to-control-uefi-bios-pxe-booting/

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: den 21 januari 2015 14:41
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: SCCM 2012 R2 and PXE boot

Whats 66 and 67 set to?

PXE Log will not show anything as its only responding on DHCP packages, of 
which it will get nothing depending on setup.

Consider using IP helpers instead of 66/67 of you can.

//A
http://2pintsoftware.com

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of David McSpadden
Sent: den 21 januari 2015 14:36
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: SCCM 2012 R2 and PXE boot

Can ping both the FQDN and IP address of the DP.


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of CM, ArvindKumar
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 8:29 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: SCCM 2012 R2 and PXE boot

Looks like the PXE boot server is not responding.  PC may get an IP from DHCP 
but it will only boot when it get boot info from PXE server.

Normally when PC receives the PXE boot server info from DHCP (option 66 and 67) 
it will request the PXE server (unicast) for boot information.  Please check if 
you can reach /ping the PXE server from the PC lan.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of David McSpadden
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 6:35 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] SCCM 2012 R2 and PXE boot

I am trying to PXE boot my first workstation to SCMM 2012 R2.
My PXE boot on my workstation sees my DHCP server.  I have added 066 and 067 to 
the DHCP options but the workstation fails to boot.
It gets an address from the DHCP server then it trys to TFTP??
Then it fails.
I see it in the DHCP lease but I see nothing in the SMSPXE.log on the SCCM 2012 
server??
I have never booted to PXE in the past so I am a total virgin in this area.


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.



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.

RE: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

[Phil Wilcock]

Timely article from Mr Anderson today on this very topic - 
http://blogs.technet.com/b/in_the_cloud/archive/2015/03/04/what-we-re-doing-amp-why-we-ll-do-it-our-enterprise-mobility-world-views.aspx


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of rodtr...@myitforum.com
Sent: 03 March 2015 21:20
To: SMS
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

Well, if you want to get technical, since licensing is now per user instead of 
per device…

Modern User Management?  

From: Marcum, Johnmailto:jmar...@babc.com
Sent: ‎Tuesday‎, ‎March‎ ‎3‎, ‎2015 ‎3‎:‎52‎ ‎PM
To: SMSmailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com

I like Modern devices better than Mobile and that's what I am hearing when 
talking to product team folks.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 1:38 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

And, really it’s not about devices – or at least what we think computing 
devices are today. I see Intune taking on additional management capabilities in 
the near future to manage even IoT and wearables. At least, it has to.

It should actually be “mobility management”

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Michael Niehaus
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 2:22 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

Yes, “mobile device management” isn’t just for mobile devices ☺

Windows Intune has its own agent, or with Windows 8.1 and above it can use 
OMA-DM protocols that are built into the OS.  With Windows 8.1, those are 
fairly limited, so the focus is more on BYOD scenarios (for desktops) and 
lightweight management (phones and desktops).  For Windows 10, there will be 
more capabilities added (explored in detail at Ignite).

Of course Intune also does iOS, Android, etc.

Thanks,
-Michael

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Heaton, Joseph@Wildlife
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:14 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com'
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

Looks like I really need to read up on Intune.  I thought it was just for 
mobile devices, but it seems I’m completely wrong on that.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of 
rodtr...@myitforum.commailto:rodtr...@myitforum.com
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 4:40 PM
To: SMS
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

I was there for the actual keynote. There's a bit of semantics going on. 
Workloads for the foreseeable future can mean a number of things, and there's 
been a LOT of activity in the background since that keynote.

The core message is that Microsoft intends to support customers - not products. 
Microsoft understands that customers are inherently slow to adopt new products 
that require massive migrations. There are customers still running CM 2007, 
even SMS 2003. So, when it's said that CM will be supported for the foreseeable 
future, it means as long as customers are still running it.

Focus is on Intune right now, and has been for a long while. CM may see some 
improvements, but only in areas where it makes sense to the Microsoft vision. 
Don't expect major new features. For example, one of the bigger features we'll 
see in the Fall for CM 2012 R2 is better integration with Intune. App and OS 
delivery are the only real pieces of CM that can't be Cloud-based right now, 
but that change is coming. Microsoft will attempt to  make Windows 10 the 
compelling reason for customers to move to Intune with changes in how apps and 
the OS delivers.



From: 'Bill Bernat'mailto:bill.ber...@adaptiva.com
Sent: ‎Friday‎, ‎February‎ ‎27‎, ‎2015 ‎2‎:‎09‎ ‎PM
To: SMSmailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com

It’s a fascinating topic. Here’s a recent take from Brad Anderson: 
http://redmondmag.com/articles/2015/02/23/system-center-configuration-manager-future.aspx.

-billb

From: Andreas Hammarskjöld 
jun...@2pintsoftware.commailto:jun...@2pintsoftware.com
Reply-To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com 
mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Date: Friday, February 27, 2015 at 10:58 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com 
mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

But also remember what wise men say: “One does not just migrate 20 years of 
code in to Mordor… sorry the Cloud”

MS focuses primarily on the Cloud right now, but we all know were few people 
actually use it. Does Intune even cover 1% of the ConfigMgr install base? And I 
am not 

RE: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

[Phil Wilcock]

Indeed! There’s a great blog from Mr Sandys here 
http://blog.configmgrftw.com/comparing-the-two-modes-of-microsoft-intune/  
which compares the two modes of Intune

What’s interesting about Intune is the rate at which features can be/are being 
added with it being a Cloud Based service..

Phil


Phil Wilcock
2Pint Software
http://2pintsoftware.comhttp://2pintsoftware.com/



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Heaton, Joseph@Wildlife
Sent: 03 March 2015 19:14
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com'
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

Looks like I really need to read up on Intune.  I thought it was just for 
mobile devices, but it seems I’m completely wrong on that.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of 
rodtr...@myitforum.commailto:rodtr...@myitforum.com
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 4:40 PM
To: SMS
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

I was there for the actual keynote. There's a bit of semantics going on. 
Workloads for the foreseeable future can mean a number of things, and there's 
been a LOT of activity in the background since that keynote.

The core message is that Microsoft intends to support customers - not products. 
Microsoft understands that customers are inherently slow to adopt new products 
that require massive migrations. There are customers still running CM 2007, 
even SMS 2003. So, when it's said that CM will be supported for the foreseeable 
future, it means as long as customers are still running it.

Focus is on Intune right now, and has been for a long while. CM may see some 
improvements, but only in areas where it makes sense to the Microsoft vision. 
Don't expect major new features. For example, one of the bigger features we'll 
see in the Fall for CM 2012 R2 is better integration with Intune. App and OS 
delivery are the only real pieces of CM that can't be Cloud-based right now, 
but that change is coming. Microsoft will attempt to  make Windows 10 the 
compelling reason for customers to move to Intune with changes in how apps and 
the OS delivers.



From: 'Bill Bernat'mailto:bill.ber...@adaptiva.com
Sent: ‎Friday‎, ‎February‎ ‎27‎, ‎2015 ‎2‎:‎09‎ ‎PM
To: SMSmailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com

It’s a fascinating topic. Here’s a recent take from Brad Anderson: 
http://redmondmag.com/articles/2015/02/23/system-center-configuration-manager-future.aspx.

-billb

From: Andreas Hammarskjöld 
jun...@2pintsoftware.commailto:jun...@2pintsoftware.com
Reply-To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com 
mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Date: Friday, February 27, 2015 at 10:58 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com 
mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

But also remember what wise men say: “One does not just migrate 20 years of 
code in to Mordor… sorry the Cloud”

MS focuses primarily on the Cloud right now, but we all know were few people 
actually use it. Does Intune even cover 1% of the ConfigMgr install base? And I 
am not talking purchased or licensed, I am talking about deployed.

So MS faces the options to put in a few years to make Intune better with zero 
new stuff in ConfigMgr, which will make existing customer base angry, making 
future sells harder. Alternative is to do a split where some like 70% goes 
towards the Cloud and 30% to keep customer happy enough. But that won’t make 
the “market” people as they want a good story and strong figures on cloud and 
market share in that. The lack of ConfigMgr sessions at these events since 
there are very few new features, i.e. not so much dev time for our friend 
ConfigMgr.

In my previous role at my old company I was in exactly the same spot as MS. I 
had to develop new things for the cloud, and still maintain good ol’ “slow 
moving software”. It’s not an easy game. MS will make most mistake’s again with 
Intune as they did with ConfigMgr, because people are like that. Writing new 
code generates bugs, period, since developers are human. So it will be slower 
than they think, and when no new stuff comes to existing platform owners they 
will start not to renew Enterprise deals since there is a lack of roadmap, 
people will raise hell internally. And then God knows what will happen.

So basically, Microsoft has to develop a kick-ass Intune with the same feature 
set that it took them 20 years to put into ConfigMgr + more. And this they have 
to do in a very short timeframe before losing new or existing customers. I 
think I recall that ConfigMgr 2012 was 9 million lines of code and the test 
tools had 4.5 million, so to finish in 5 years time they have to check in more 
than 12000 perfect lines of code each day. You do the math! ☺

Anyhow, my 2 cents after having 2Pints! So conditions do apply, now off to 
pester mr

RE: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

[Phil Wilcock]

That may be true - but even the ConfigMgr sessions that have been announced are 
99% level 300 or lower, so not much in depth.

And it's February! - Ignite is in May and they still haven't firmed up the 
sessions? I don't think so..

If you're planning to attend conferences as part of your training most folks 
need to know well in advance what's on so that they can get authorization and 
book hotels etc. or consider other conferences

Just go to MMS :)

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Harjit Dhaliwal
Sent: 19 February 2015 16:44
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

I think you are being a little swift with your assumptions.  The full session 
catalog has not been completed and Ignite has mentioned that they are going to 
be adding much more to the catalog including System Center stuff.  There are 
quite a few of us from the ConfigMgr community who will be attending the 
conference.

-Harjit
On 2/19/2015 11:36 AM, Andreas Hammarskjöld wrote:
Hey Ivan,

If you are looking for ConfigMgr integration Ignite might not be your best 
place to hunt. The total lack of ConfigMgr sessions have led to the ConfigMgr 
community already renamed the conference MS Ignore (for several reasons).

Might change, although unlikely, but damage is already done.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Troy Martin
Sent: den 19 februari 2015 17:24
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

Hey Ivan,

Have them stop by the 1E booth.  In the meantime, check out our site - 
http://www.1e.com/appclarity-software-asset-management/


Thanks :)

Troy L. Martin | Product Manager, Endpoint Automation
Provision software, not infrastructure
US Mobile: +1 (678) 898-6147
UK Phone : +44 208 326 9141
troy.mar...@1e.commailto:troy.mar...@1e.com | www.1e.comhttp://www.1e.com/

[cid:image003.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]http://www.1e.com/  [Blog_Bling_Connect] 
http://ignite.microsoft.com/
[cid:image010.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]https://www.facebook.com/1Eglobal[cid:image011.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]https://twitter.com/1E_Global/[cid:image012.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]http://www.linkedin.com/company/1e[cid:image013.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]http://www.1e.com/blogs/index.php[cid:image014.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]http://blogs.1e.com/feed/[cid:image015.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]https://plus.google.com/+1EGlobal/posts

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Lindenfeld, Ivan
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 10:57 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

I have a colleague in the ITAM space wanting to shop but needs to make sure 
hunting will be rich.  We don't see a vendor list on the Ignite web site.

It would go a long way toward justifying the trip.

Thanks for any pointers.

Ivan Lindenfeld


NOTICE: The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or 
confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient of 
this communication, you are hereby notified to: (i) delete the message and all 
copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and 
(iii) notify the sender immediately.





Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is 
addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this message 
in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this email or 
calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email and any 
attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized use, 
disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is strictly 
prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do 
not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this email will 
operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract.

[mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

[Phil Wilcock]

I think MS has a big Cloud/O365 etc agenda to push, which is reflected in the 
content.

I'm glad in a way that SC content there is limited - but only from a selfish 
point of view, and only because of the work of the MMS guys to 're-ignite' (pun 
intended) the whole System Center conference genre.

IT/Dev Connections is looking good too - we're certainly considering both - as 
a fairly small/new vendor these conferences put us in with exactly the right 
audience.

I think we'd be a bit lost at Ignite TBH, and am really looking forward to MMS 
and or DevConn!

Cheers

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Daniel Ratliff
Sent: 19 February 2015 17:30
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

I always use this example to describe my benefit from the conferences:

TechEd 2013 - Took 4 pages of notes
TechEd 2014 - Took 1.5 pages of notes
MMS 2014 - Took 9 pages of notes

The gain for me speaks for itself.

Daniel Ratliff

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marcum, John
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 12:25 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

I think MS has sent a clear message about the Systems Management community and 
conferences and for that reason I'll second what Andreas said below.

I did attend TechEd last year, it was okay but I say that because I enjoyed 
attending non-SCCM sessions. I found myself tired of the sale ole content at 
MMS year in and year out. I really like what Brian Mason is doing with the 
new MMS, sessions that have been presented elsewhere or previously aren't 
allowed at that conference. Unfortunately for me the timing of that one is 
terrible for me, or at least it was last year. This year I'm going to IT/Dev 
Connections but whatever conference(s) you decide to attend I'd highly 
encourage you to look outside of the vendor sponsored/specific conferences.




From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marable, Mike
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 10:58 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

+1



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 11:37 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

Hey Ivan,

If you are looking for ConfigMgr integration Ignite might not be your best 
place to hunt. The total lack of ConfigMgr sessions have led to the ConfigMgr 
community already renamed the conference MS Ignore (for several reasons).

Might change, although unlikely, but damage is already done.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Troy Martin
Sent: den 19 februari 2015 17:24
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

Hey Ivan,

Have them stop by the 1E booth.  In the meantime, check out our site - 
http://www.1e.com/appclarity-software-asset-management/


Thanks :)

Troy L. Martin | Product Manager, Endpoint Automation
Provision software, not infrastructure
US Mobile: +1 (678) 898-6147
UK Phone : +44 208 326 9141
troy.mar...@1e.commailto:troy.mar...@1e.com | www.1e.comhttp://www.1e.com/

[cid:image003.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]http://www.1e.com/  [Blog_Bling_Connect] 
http://ignite.microsoft.com/
[cid:image010.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]https://www.facebook.com/1Eglobal[cid:image011.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]https://twitter.com/1E_Global/[cid:image012.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]http://www.linkedin.com/company/1e[cid:image013.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]http://www.1e.com/blogs/index.php[cid:image014.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]http://blogs.1e.com/feed/[cid:image015.png@01D0422A.F408EE30]https://plus.google.com/+1EGlobal/posts

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Lindenfeld, Ivan
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 10:57 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] (OT) Vendor list for Ignite?

I have a colleague in the ITAM space wanting to shop but needs to make sure 
hunting will be rich.  We don't see a vendor list on the Ignite web site.

It would go a long way toward justifying the trip.

Thanks for any pointers.

Ivan Lindenfeld


NOTICE: The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or 
confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient of 
this communication, you are hereby notified to: (i) delete the message and all 

RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 2012R2 CU3 clients

[Phil Wilcock]

Hi George,

It’s all V1 in that scenario

Regards

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of George Salmaniw
Sent: 29 January 2015 22:02
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 
2012R2 CU3 clients

OK am getting a proper response now
It is indicating that no BranchCaching is enabled, even though event logs to 
the same DP is showing that caching is taking place
Maybe my BC min ver, max ver and ver is wrong?
Clients are W7SP1 and servers are W2K8R2
What version of BC runs on this configuration?
G

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Andreas Hammarskjöld 
jun...@2pintsoftware.commailto:jun...@2pintsoftware.com wrote:
1# What command line are you using? Should work fine with .sccm (as it says in 
the cmd line help), be sure to check spaces and that BC min ver, max ver and 
ver is included in command!

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] 
On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: den 26 januari 2015 21:27
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 
2012R2 CU3 clients

Hi George,

Answers inline below..

Cheers

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of George Salmaniw

Sent: 26 January 2015 19:10
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 
2012R2 CU3 clients

Thanks for the explanations Phil.  Really appreciate it!
It does raise other questions:
QUESTION #1
I attempted to use the HashiBashi tool, copying the URL path right out of the 
event log e.g.

http://CMSERVER.DOMAIN:80/SMS_DP_SMSPKG$/Content_a33c2e1c-c1a8-4fe3-8f6c-cadd57a07570.1/sccm?/uninstall.exe

but it always returns Invalid Command Line.  So I'm a bit confused.  Wouldn't 
the values captured in the event logs show the actual paths used to download 
the identified file?
I also read you can view packages by using the following URL in a browser:
http://cmserver.domain/SMS_DP_SMSPKG$
However in my environment I'm receiving HTTP 404 error.  If I add pkglib to the 
URL

http://cmserver/SMS_DP_SMSPKG$/pkglib

I do see the ini files, just not the parent folder.Not sure if this is 
expected behaviour or not, or if I don't have the appropriate security 
credentials to see the files.  I don't manage the SCCM 2012 infrastructure and 
not sure if paths have been changed or not.
#1 URL Path – try this – you need to take out the ‘SCCM?’ i.e
http://CMSERVER.DOMAIN:80/SMS_DP_SMSPKG$/Content_a33c2e1c-c1a8-4fe3-8f6c-cadd57a07570.1/uninstall.exe

Regarding the other URL’s – it’s pretty locked down so I wouldn’t have thought 
that you have access to that, and I wouldn’t worry too much about it.

QUESTION #2
How does one go about automatically hashing DP files on a newly rebooted W2K8R2 
server?  I looked at your site and didn't see any information on how this can 
be accomplished.

#2 – Not easy to auto-create hashes on W2K8R2 server. Once you get HashiBashi 
working you would have to script something to get it to trigger a hash creation 
for each file – so you’d point it at a folder and it would recurse each file. 
We are looking at making this a lot easier.


QUESTION #3
Is it better to allow a better connected site to run Branch Cache and therefore 
generate the hashes on behalf of poorly connected sites?  Speaking of 
BranchCache, is enabling BranchCache at well connected sites even recommended 
and if so, what are some of the advantages/disadvantages?
#3 – Yes it’s fine to enable BC on your better connected sites. It’s also a 
good idea (if possible) during deployments, to target those better connected 
sites first, so that they can trigger the Hash creation if necessary ahead of 
your slower connected sites. There aren’t really any disadvantages – it may be 
ever so slightly slower but not so you’d notice..

QUESTION #4
We currently have BITS disabled as per SCCM client settings.  What is the 
recommended settings for introducing BITS throttling?  Is there a way to define 
individual BITS settings for different sites, based on network performance, or 
is that even possible?  Or is it one size fits all?
BITS  Throttling in SCCM just sets the same reg keys that Group Policy does. 
BITS Group Policy gives you a lot more options around schedules etc, and can of 
course be applied on a per-site basis. Also, if you set the policy via SCCM – 
it doesn’t check it again unless the policy is changed in SCCM – so if  the 
LOCAL BITS policy is changed – say it gets overwritten by GP then SCCM won’t 
reset it..
BITS/BranchCache behave better when throttled – even if it’s not really 
required I would still set it to the max value. As for guidelines with 
throttling – it’s

RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 2012R2 CU3 clients

[Phil Wilcock]

Below..

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of George Salmaniw
Sent: 29 January 2015 22:11
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 
2012R2 CU3 clients

Phil,

Outstanding responses inline below..

George


QUESTION #2
How does one go about automatically hashing DP files on a newly rebooted W2K8R2 
server?  I looked at your site and didn't see any information on how this can 
be accomplished.

#2 – Not easy to auto-create hashes on W2K8R2 server. Once you get HashiBashi 
working you would have to script something to get it to trigger a hash creation 
for each file – so you’d point it at a folder and it would recurse each file. 
We are looking at making this a lot easier.

I would be interested in that for sure!

QUESTION #3
Is it better to allow a better connected site to run Branch Cache and therefore 
generate the hashes on behalf of poorly connected sites?  Speaking of 
BranchCache, is enabling BranchCache at well connected sites even recommended 
and if so, what are some of the advantages/disadvantages?
#3 – Yes it’s fine to enable BC on your better connected sites. It’s also a 
good idea (if possible) during deployments, to target those better connected 
sites first, so that they can trigger the Hash creation if necessary ahead of 
your slower connected sites. There aren’t really any disadvantages – it may be 
ever so slightly slower but not so you’d notice..

Super advice ... I am testing that now as I want to avoid the need for two 
beachheads.  Question though, if the W2K8R2 is rebooted, then all the hashes 
need to be regenerated.  Once regenerated, the local caches can still be used 
correct?
Yep the local cache data is still fine – the hashes don’t change if the server 
reboots, they just need re-creating.
QUESTION #4
We currently have BITS disabled as per SCCM client settings.  What is the 
recommended settings for introducing BITS throttling?  Is there a way to define 
individual BITS settings for different sites, based on network performance, or 
is that even possible?  Or is it one size fits all?
BITS  Throttling in SCCM just sets the same reg keys that Group Policy does. 
BITS Group Policy gives you a lot more options around schedules etc, and can of 
course be applied on a per-site basis. Also, if you set the policy via SCCM – 
it doesn’t check it again unless the policy is changed in SCCM – so if  the 
LOCAL BITS policy is changed – say it gets overwritten by GP then SCCM won’t 
reset it..
BITS/BranchCache behave better when throttled – even if it’s not really 
required I would still set it to the max value. As for guidelines with 
throttling – it’s always tricky to advise – you have to work out your WAN 
speed/Other traffic/Time of delivery/content size and frequency etc and make a 
call based on that.
Again thank you for this advice.  I will try and apply a GPO policy to one of 
our remote sites to see if this improves BranchCache/BITS performance



On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Phil Wilcock 
ph...@2pintsoftware.commailto:ph...@2pintsoftware.com wrote:
Hi George,

Answers inline below..

Cheers

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] 
On Behalf Of George Salmaniw
Sent: 26 January 2015 19:10
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 
2012R2 CU3 clients

Thanks for the explanations Phil.  Really appreciate it!
It does raise other questions:
QUESTION #1
I attempted to use the HashiBashi tool, copying the URL path right out of the 
event log e.g.

http://CMSERVER.DOMAIN:80/SMS_DP_SMSPKG$/Content_a33c2e1c-c1a8-4fe3-8f6c-cadd57a07570.1/sccm?/uninstall.exe

but it always returns Invalid Command Line.  So I'm a bit confused.  Wouldn't 
the values captured in the event logs show the actual paths used to download 
the identified file?
I also read you can view packages by using the following URL in a browser:
http://cmserver.domain/SMS_DP_SMSPKG$
However in my environment I'm receiving HTTP 404 error.  If I add pkglib to the 
URL

http://cmserver/SMS_DP_SMSPKG$/pkglib

I do see the ini files, just not the parent folder.Not sure if this is 
expected behaviour or not, or if I don't have the appropriate security 
credentials to see the files.  I don't manage the SCCM 2012 infrastructure and 
not sure if paths have been changed or not.
#1 URL Path – try this – you need to take out the ‘SCCM?’ i.e
http://CMSERVER.DOMAIN:80/SMS_DP_SMSPKG$/Content_a33c2e1c-c1a8-4fe3-8f6c-cadd57a07570.1/uninstall.exe

Regarding the other URL’s – it’s pretty locked down so I wouldn’t have thought 
that you have access to that, and I wouldn’t worry too much about it.

QUESTION #2
How does one go about automatically hashing DP files on a newly rebooted W2K8R2 
server?  I looked at your site

RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 2012R2 CU3 clients

[Phil Wilcock]

George,

Welcome to the confusing and crazy world of BranchCache and BITS. Here’s a 
couple of pointers. Rest assured that it can all work pretty effectively once 
you get the hang of things.

Firstly, you need to understand how BranchCache hashes figure in all of this. 
Until a PC has the hash of the segment that it is downloading, it can’t share 
that segment with other peers, and the content won’t even be in the BranchCache 
Cache. So that first download that you see from PC1 will be a non-BranchCache 
enabled download as the hash won’t be available on the server yet. You can get 
the server to generate hashes in advance – on Server 2012 you can use PS but in 
your case you can download our HashiBashi tool which will do the same. - 
http://2pintsoftware.com/products/hashibashi/?portfolioID=10530

If the hash is not pre-created then it is the SECOND PC that does the download 
that will get the hash and therefore be able to share the files.
(All this works much better in SRV2012 where the server sends a 
‘MakeHashRequest’ back in the http header – although BITS is still too dumb to 
act on this even in Win8.1)

BITS event log – also check for Event 4 – which is the end of the Job and tells 
you the proportion of files that came from the server vs local peers.

Network latency – has nothing to do with HTTP downloads, which is what BITS is 
using here.

As far as clients getting content from the server instead of peers – this can 
happen  if all clients try to get the content at the same time.
IF your content has 10 files for instance – SCCM client gets the manifest, but 
then seems to randomize the order in which the files are added to the BITS job.
So this can mean that BITS on PC1 will be attempting to get FILE1 at the same 
time as PC2 is trying to grab FILE10

BITS + BranchCache behaves best (especially with SRV2008 and Win7) if the 
client start times are staggered so that certain clients can get a head start 
on the content. Id an ideal situation you might want to make a collection of 
‘Beachhead’ PC’s that will DL the content first – one at each site.

The Event 311 error is I think nothing to worry about but can’t remember off 
the top of my head – maybe my esteemed colleague Junior can?

Anyway – have a dig around on out site, here’s the FAQ which might help - 
http://2pintsoftware.com/2psfaqs/

Also our free BranchCache reporting is a good way of visualizing exactly which 
client is getting content from the server vs peers.

Good luck – and please feel free to ping me any questions offline if you wish.

Cheers

Phil


Phil Wilcock
2Pint Software
http://2pintsoftware.com





From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of George Salmaniw
Sent: 23 January 2015 21:05
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 2012R2 
CU3 clients

Am testing Branch Cache for possible use at remote sites and getting mixed 
results.  Client is Windows 7SP1 fully patched running the SCCM 2012R2 CU3 
client.  The server is 2008R2 running SCCM 2012R2 CU3.  I have four remote test 
sites consisting of anywhere from 2 to 5 test PCs per site.  Branch cache has 
been enable via GPO for test PCs as per MS BranchCache documentation.  Settings 
have been verified via

netsh branchcache show status all

On the server side, BranchCache has been checked under the Distribution Point 
properties: Enable and configure BranchCache for this distribution point



Using the Bits-Client Operational log the standard event order I am seeing is 
as follows:

Event ID 59 - BITS started the CCMDTS Job transfer job
Event ID 203 - The BITS service provided job credentials in response to the 
NEGOTIATE authentication challenge from … for the CCMDTS Job transfer job that 
is associated with the following URL … The credentials for the user were 
accepted.
Event ID 60 - BITS stopped transferring the CCMDTS Job transfer job that is 
associated with the [the file]. The status code is 0x0.

So all looks in order in terms of the file being downloaded.  Within the 
Details of Event ID 60 we can confirm whether peer caching was used by the 
following variables:

peerProtocolFlags – a value of 1 means that peer caching was used to download 
the file; a value of 0 means it was downloaded from the server
bytesTransferredFromPeer – the actual bytes transferred from the peer cache


So here is what I am observing:

I install an application package on PC#1 for the first time at the remote site. 
 The event logs shows a value of 0 for peerProtocolFlags for all event ID 60 
entries
I install the same application package on PC#2.  Theoretically it should be 
pulling the files from peer cache.  What I am seeing are some files are pulled 
from the peer cache, while others are pulled from the server.  QUESTION:  is 
network latency [I have set it to 80msec] checked for each individual file?  If 
so, does that explain why some files are copied from the local cache

RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 2012R2 CU3 clients

[Phil Wilcock]

Oh, and just remembered – Event 311 is when the file is too small for 
BranchCache – minimum size is 64k – you CAN lower this value but be careful, 
config in the registry and pretty sure it wouldn’t be supported but I have it 
tweaked down to 4k on my test rig:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Services\PeerDistKM\Parameters


Cheers

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: 24 January 2015 08:39
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 
2012R2 CU3 clients

George,

Welcome to the confusing and crazy world of BranchCache and BITS. Here’s a 
couple of pointers. Rest assured that it can all work pretty effectively once 
you get the hang of things.

Firstly, you need to understand how BranchCache hashes figure in all of this. 
Until a PC has the hash of the segment that it is downloading, it can’t share 
that segment with other peers, and the content won’t even be in the BranchCache 
Cache. So that first download that you see from PC1 will be a non-BranchCache 
enabled download as the hash won’t be available on the server yet. You can get 
the server to generate hashes in advance – on Server 2012 you can use PS but in 
your case you can download our HashiBashi tool which will do the same. - 
http://2pintsoftware.com/products/hashibashi/?portfolioID=10530

If the hash is not pre-created then it is the SECOND PC that does the download 
that will get the hash and therefore be able to share the files.
(All this works much better in SRV2012 where the server sends a 
‘MakeHashRequest’ back in the http header – although BITS is still too dumb to 
act on this even in Win8.1)

BITS event log – also check for Event 4 – which is the end of the Job and tells 
you the proportion of files that came from the server vs local peers.

Network latency – has nothing to do with HTTP downloads, which is what BITS is 
using here.

As far as clients getting content from the server instead of peers – this can 
happen  if all clients try to get the content at the same time.
IF your content has 10 files for instance – SCCM client gets the manifest, but 
then seems to randomize the order in which the files are added to the BITS job.
So this can mean that BITS on PC1 will be attempting to get FILE1 at the same 
time as PC2 is trying to grab FILE10

BITS + BranchCache behaves best (especially with SRV2008 and Win7) if the 
client start times are staggered so that certain clients can get a head start 
on the content. Id an ideal situation you might want to make a collection of 
‘Beachhead’ PC’s that will DL the content first – one at each site.

The Event 311 error is I think nothing to worry about but can’t remember off 
the top of my head – maybe my esteemed colleague Junior can?

Anyway – have a dig around on out site, here’s the FAQ which might help - 
http://2pintsoftware.com/2psfaqs/

Also our free BranchCache reporting is a good way of visualizing exactly which 
client is getting content from the server vs peers.

Good luck – and please feel free to ping me any questions offline if you wish.

Cheers

Phil


Phil Wilcock
2Pint Software
http://2pintsoftware.com





From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of George Salmaniw
Sent: 23 January 2015 21:05
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 2012R2 
CU3 clients

Am testing Branch Cache for possible use at remote sites and getting mixed 
results.  Client is Windows 7SP1 fully patched running the SCCM 2012R2 CU3 
client.  The server is 2008R2 running SCCM 2012R2 CU3.  I have four remote test 
sites consisting of anywhere from 2 to 5 test PCs per site.  Branch cache has 
been enable via GPO for test PCs as per MS BranchCache documentation.  Settings 
have been verified via

netsh branchcache show status all

On the server side, BranchCache has been checked under the Distribution Point 
properties: Enable and configure BranchCache for this distribution point



Using the Bits-Client Operational log the standard event order I am seeing is 
as follows:

Event ID 59 - BITS started the CCMDTS Job transfer job
Event ID 203 - The BITS service provided job credentials in response to the 
NEGOTIATE authentication challenge from … for the CCMDTS Job transfer job that 
is associated with the following URL … The credentials for the user were 
accepted.
Event ID 60 - BITS stopped transferring the CCMDTS Job transfer job that is 
associated with the [the file]. The status code is 0x0.

So all looks in order in terms of the file being downloaded.  Within the 
Details of Event ID 60 we can confirm whether peer caching was used by the 
following variables:

peerProtocolFlags – a value of 1 means that peer caching was used to download 
the file; a value of 0 means it was downloaded from

RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 2012R2 CU3 clients

[Phil Wilcock]

Oh, and also…

Are you using any kind of throttling with BITS – i.e either through SCCM or 
Policy? We would recommend it, and BITS behaves better when throttled – 
especially over slow links.
Here’s why:
BITS background transfers achieve their desired throttled download rate by 
splitting a file download into a series of range requests. So the size and 
frequency of the range requests dictates the throttled download rate. BITS can 
only use BranchCache after retrieving the hashes for a given range request so 
the speed of the range requests dictates the speed of BranchCache. In other 
words, set a throttle rate and you’ve more chance of giving the server a chance 
to get the hashing completed in time to make use of BranchCache..



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 24 January 2015 09:23
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 
2012R2 CU3 clients

As Senior finally remembered (maybe add this to the FAQ?) is that the BC API 
squirts(!) back a 311 error if the file does not meet the requirement of being 
a BranchCache enabled file. There are a few reasons why this can happen, most 
likely is that the file is too small.

About the hash generation, if the client starts the download there is some code 
in there that is supposed to kick in and then tell the client that it’s time to 
switch to BranchCache. The client then is supposed to get the “partial” hash 
i.e. anything that is left of the file to download will be BranchCache enabled 
and could be shared with PC2. If you are on a fast link, the server won’t have 
had time to generate the hash until the file is downloaded. If you do the same 
thing on a 2Mb/s pipe, it works better. But we have seen some cases where this 
doesn’t always work, but not enough to action it.

We have 3 suggestions for this scenario:


1.   When you are distribution a package to your organization, typically 
the larger client base is on good connections, so they will trigger the hash 
generation before slower WAN clients come in to get it.

2.   Also, in a typical production environment the built in slowness of the 
WAN will sort this out, as the hash will be generated in time to still make the 
DL efficient, so not many bytes will cross the wire until the hash is done.

3.   If you are still seeing issues with this, and we suspect the Win7 
implementation of this is extra flaky (or not working) then you can trigger an 
automatic hash creation using our HashiBashi tool. We had great plans for 
sorting this out, but stopped as out testing showed that it was only really in 
a POC environment where you saw the issue. But if needed, I will add in the 
functionality to trigger hash creation on package updates.

Ps. Since your DP is 2008 R2, it will also loose the hashes on reboot, so might 
be worth that we explore the HashiBashi toolset to combat this.

Best regards,

//Andreas

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: den 24 januari 2015 09:47
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 
2012R2 CU3 clients

Oh, and just remembered – Event 311 is when the file is too small for 
BranchCache – minimum size is 64k – you CAN lower this value but be careful, 
config in the registry and pretty sure it wouldn’t be supported but I have it 
tweaked down to 4k on my test rig:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Services\PeerDistKM\Parameters


Cheers

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: 24 January 2015 08:39
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] BranchCache not working as expected when serving SCCM 
2012R2 CU3 clients

George,

Welcome to the confusing and crazy world of BranchCache and BITS. Here’s a 
couple of pointers. Rest assured that it can all work pretty effectively once 
you get the hang of things.

Firstly, you need to understand how BranchCache hashes figure in all of this. 
Until a PC has the hash of the segment that it is downloading, it can’t share 
that segment with other peers, and the content won’t even be in the BranchCache 
Cache. So that first download that you see from PC1 will be a non-BranchCache 
enabled download as the hash won’t be available on the server yet. You can get 
the server to generate hashes in advance – on Server 2012 you can use PS but in 
your case you can download our HashiBashi tool which will do the same. - 
http://2pintsoftware.com/products/hashibashi/?portfolioID=10530

If the hash is not pre-created then it is the SECOND PC that does the download 
that will get the hash and therefore be able to share the files.
(All this works much

[mssms] RE: OT: Windows 10 and Software Assurance

[Phil Wilcock]

:)

I think there's going to be some confusion round this for a while.

My question was aimed at the possibility of MS giving an incentive to corps to 
jump from Win7 - Win10 in the same way they have consumers..

http://blogs.gartner.com/jonah-kowall/2015/01/23/the-truth-about-microsofts-new-licensing-change-guest-post/

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Marcum, John
Sent: 23 January 2015 18:25
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: OT: Windows 10 and Software Assurance

free??? I think it's more like One of the benefits of purchasing Software 
Assurance is the ability to always run the latest operating system It's 
definitely not free

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Michael Niehaus
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 12:22 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: OT: Windows 10 and Software Assurance

Software Assurance customers always get free upgrades :)

Thanks,
-Michael

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 4:13 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] OT: Windows 10 and Software Assurance

Anyone heard any firm info on what the deal is gonna be for SA customers with 
regards to Win10 ugrades?

Or is it TBC..

Tia

Phil 2Pint



Phil Wilcock
2Pint Software
http://2pintsoftware.com






Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be protected by 
the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have received this 
message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and then 
delete it from your computer.



Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be protected by 
the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have received this 
message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and then 
delete it from your computer.

RE: [mssms] OT: Windows 10 and Software Assurance

[Phil Wilcock]

This just in..

http://www.computerworld.com/article/2867542/microsoft-touts-7-per-user-monthly-pricing-for-windows-subscriptions.html

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 23 January 2015 12:58
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Windows 10 and Software Assurance

Well one would be stupid to think it would be different than Office?

So the SKU give-away, is that for consumer then, so we will see a ton of corps 
going with consumer version.. gah!

//Andreas
http://2pintsoftware.com

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent
Sent: den 23 januari 2015 13:56
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Windows 10 and Software Assurance

Not sure if there will be a deal for business, but, as of now, the free upgrade 
deal is only for consumers.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 7:13 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] OT: Windows 10 and Software Assurance

Anyone heard any firm info on what the deal is gonna be for SA customers with 
regards to Win10 ugrades?

Or is it TBC..

Tia

Phil 2Pint



Phil Wilcock
2Pint Software
http://2pintsoftware.com

[mssms] OT: Windows 10 and Software Assurance

[Phil Wilcock]

Anyone heard any firm info on what the deal is gonna be for SA customers with 
regards to Win10 ugrades?

Or is it TBC..

Tia

Phil 2Pint



Phil Wilcock
2Pint Software
http://2pintsoftware.com

[mssms] RE: Wish there was a way to control BITS

[Phil Wilcock]

No, this was a different Ed, Ed. Worked at European Central Bank - really great 
guy, Spanish, mad as a cut snake.

'them were the days :) '

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: 22 January 2015 21:11
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: Wish there was a way to control BITS

WASN'T ME!!!

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer
1E | Empowering Efficient IT
Mobile: (401) 924-2293
ed.aldr...@1e.commailto:ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.comhttp://www.1e.com/
[Description: Description: cid:image011.png@01CAD56A.EFDE3F90] Ent Cli Mgmt 
(2003-2014)
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
[SCU]http://www.systemcenteruniverse.com/

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:20 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Wish there was a way to control BITS

Oh man... as my dear old friend Eduardo would say... I sure wish there was a 
way to control BITS from the server side...

Maybe fairy godmother, Cinderella, Santa or even Mary 
censoredhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=291kT7LvQ0k Poppins could come up 
with something?

Best wishes,

Someone who ate their porridge every day.






Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is 
addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this message 
in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this email or 
calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email and any 
attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized use, 
disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is strictly 
prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do 
not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this email will 
operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract.

[mssms] RE: IsCacheCopyNeeded returned 'true' by {5777363A-FB22-4a42-ABB0-522DD42711DC} during software deployment

[Phil Wilcock]

Hi Jesse,

Looks to me like BITS is erroring somewhere in the DL - try this command on the 
client to look at the BITS job perhaps?

Bitsadmin.exe /info {insert-bits-guid-from cas.log-here} /verbose

This should point you in the right direction

Thanks


Phil



Phil Wilcock
2Pint Software
http://2pintsoftware.com

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Schauer, Jesse (jes...@uidaho.edu)
Sent: 16 January 2015 17:03
To: 'mssms@lists.myITforum.com'
Subject: [mssms] IsCacheCopyNeeded returned 'true' by 
{5777363A-FB22-4a42-ABB0-522DD42711DC} during software deployment

I am trying to deploy a rather huge piece of software (SAS 9.4, ~19G) and am 
running into some issues with clients not being able to download the content.

The software is being deployed as an application. When I set up a required 
deployment for a machine, the machine will see it, see it needs to download 
content, and try to start downloading. Around this time, CAS.log will start to 
go crazy spamming IsCacheCopyNeeded returned 'true' by 
{5777363A-FB22-4a42-ABB0-522DD42711DC}. It write about 3-5M of this per minute.

While googling around I found this thread: 
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/ce763dc6-c184-47bf-85a8-463501206000/2012-client-stuck-problem?forum=configmanagergeneral.
 There is not much detail but they do reference the dodgy registry key 
IsCacheCopyNeededCallBack (which is actually a value under 
HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\SMS\Mobile Client\ Software Distribution). Deleting 
this value causes the callback to fail, after which the content immediately 
starts downloading. It should be noted that machines that are not having these 
issues also have this registry value.

Anyone else run into this before? We've pushed a ton of software out with this 
site (though this is the largest) and have never run into this until now. I'm 
not sure what deleting the registry value does and while it seems to alleviate 
the issue, I don't want to cause unexpected issues down the road.

For reference, site and client version are ConfigMgr 2012 R2 CU1. The client 
cache size is currently set at 30G.

Jesse Schauer
Windows Server Administrator II
Endpoint Manangement Services
University of Idaho ITS

RE: [mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

[Phil Wilcock]

Yeah we’re the sneakiest of the sneaky.. and as far as looking for knowledge, 
we seem to be imparting more than we’re gathering here ☺

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 06 January 2015 23:22
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

Well that’s pretty obvious isn’t it considering our blog post before xmas? 
http://2pintsoftware.com/more-branchache-for-xmas/

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Hester Moffit
Sent: den 6 januari 2015 19:47
To: mssms
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

Sounds like a new 'product' is being vetted out in the forums.  Looking for 
knowledge, or being sneaky here?

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Andreas Hammarskjöld 
jun...@2pintsoftware.commailto:jun...@2pintsoftware.com wrote:
Microsoft only does cloud stuff these days, not client/server stuff. ;-) Will 
blog on this one once the iPXE things are sorted!

Courtesy to the syslinux community member Alexandre Blanchette; here is the 
closest I got to an explanation  guide on how to do this:

I've found a way to support PXE booting both UEFI and BIOS architectures
with Windows Server DHCP.

This method uses a feature introduced in WinServer 2012: DHCP policies.

First, in the the DHCP console, at the IPv4 root of the server, create a
vendor class named PXEClient (UEFI x64) with the following value:
PXEClient:Arch:7

Then create your configuration for your BIOS clients in your scope or as
global settings as usual by setting options 66 (IP or hostname of your TFTP
host) and 67 (pxelinux.0).

For the UEFI clients, you must then create a policy. In the condition page
of the wizard, add a condition with the following settings:
Criteria: Vendor Class
Operator: Equals
Value: PXEClient (UEFI x64)
Tick Append wildcard(*)

Do not configure an IP address range for the policy.

Finally configure options 66 (TFTP server) and 67 (syslinux.efi). You must
separate TFTP servers for your BIOS and UEFI clients because Microsoft DHCP
server does not send option 210 (path prefix).  Microsoft DHCP servers will
only send options listed in the Parameter Request List in the DHCPDISCOVER
packet.

One could make a cleaner setup by creating a BIOS PXEClient vendor class
and putting their options within a policy too.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] 
On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: den 6 januari 2015 17:06

To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

Would be nice if MSFT could update the docs to include this info, as it’s a bit 
vague as to what is ‘supported’ and what isn’t.

In this WP - http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=44598 it 
states:


An alternative to using IP Helpers is setting DHCP Options on the DHCP server, 
specifically DHCP Options 60 (PXE Client), 66 (Boot Server Host Name), and 67 
(Boot file Name). However, DHCP Options can be problematic and may not work 
reliably or consistently. Furthermore the use of DHCP Options to control PXE 
requests in Configuration Manager 2012 is not supported by Microsoft. Therefore 
the recommended and supported method of PXE booting client PCs that are on a 
different subnet than the DHCP or WDS/PXE Service Point servers is the use of 
IP Helpers.

But in here 
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc732351(WS.10).aspx#Using it says 
that Microsoft ‘does not recommend’ this method.

Bottom line here seems to be that it’s a bit complicated and therefore we’ll 
shift blame over to the HW vendors and not support it. Which is a shame because 
who wants to go to their Network guys and ask them to config  thousands of 
routers?

MS own all the bits here – make em play nice together!

Senior 2Pint

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 06 January 2015 13:11
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

Todd, we were wrong. DCHP server in Server 2012 got something called Policies, 
which can control the response behavior. This means you can control what we 
should reply to who. Just discovered this but think I can get it to send 
different boot loaders to different HW capabilities.

I can definitely set it to send my iPXE boot loader a different TFTP server in 
option 66, so should be doable. If so, I will blog about it.

So I will have to retract my statement, the MS DHCP server is pretty capable.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: den

[mssms] RE: Annoying BITS problem

[Phil Wilcock]

Hmm, this is usually a firewall/proxy issue - I would sniff the traffic with 
Message Analyzer and see what is being sent/received. This is the windows 
return value..

BG_E_INSUFFICIENT_RANGE_SUPPORT (0x80200013)
The server does not support the Content-Range header. Typically, you receive 
this error when you try to download dynamic content. You can also receive this 
error if an intermediate proxy is removing the Content-Range or Content-Length 
header.


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Casey Robertson
Sent: 07 January 2015 01:58
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Annoying BITS problem

This happens to me when running ccmsetup locally from an attempted client 
machine and from a remote Invoke-Command powershell.  Any ideas??  Tried a fix 
that told BITS to run in the foreground by modifying a table in the SUSDB.  
Didn't help.  Turned off ESET AV on SCCM server and client server.  Didn't 
help.  Any ideas??  We use a Palo Alto firewall but both of these systems are 
on the same subnet.

![LOG[Download Update: Connecting to the 
server.]LOG]!time=17:55:30.694+480 date=01-06-2015 component=ccmsetup 
context= type=1 thread=3316 file=ccmsetup.cpp:6586
![LOG[Failed to download files through BITS. Error: 0x80200013, Description 
The server does not support the necessary HTTP protocol. Background Intelligent 
Transfer Service (BITS) requires that the server support the Range protocol 
header.
, Context: The error occurred while the remote file was being processed.
.]LOG]!time=17:55:49.699+480 date=01-06-2015 component=ccmsetup 
context= type=3 thread=3316 file=ccmsetup.cpp:6561
![LOG[Failed to download client files by BITS. Error 
0x80200013]LOG]!time=17:55:49.699+480 date=01-06-2015 
component=ccmsetup context= type=3 thread=3316 file=ccmsetup.cpp:6618

Casey Robertson
Systems Engineer
W 619.878.9099
E casey.robert...@mindbodyonline.commailto:casey.robert...@mindbodyonline.com

MINDBODY, Inc.
4051 Broad Street, Suite 220
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

  [Logo-for-email-signature.jpg] http://www.mindbodyonline.com/

[mssms] Re: Annoying BITS problem

[Phil Wilcock]

?can you do a manual download via BITS? i.e using bitsadmin.exe to copy a file 
from the same server to the client? What does the BITS event log say - are all 
BITS jobs failing (if there are any)? My preferred test tools for these kinds 
of issues are Fiddler (on the client) and Message Analyzer - you need to see 
what's in the BITS request header that is getting through to the server if 
possible.


cheers


Phil


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com listsad...@lists.myitforum.com on behalf 
of Casey Robertson casey.robert...@mindbodyonline.com
Sent: 07 January 2015 19:01
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: Annoying BITS problem

Will try that.  To update (and address Andreas' post):


1.Turned off Windows firewall on client

2.Turned off Windows firewall on SCCM server

3.Monitored our PAN firewall during this - servers are on same 
subnet...firewall is seeing no traffic between them.

4.   Servers are not behind a load balancer or anything

5.   Confirmed I can browse via HTTP to the http://siteserver/CCM_Client 
path

Running out of ideas.about to open a case with MS.  Any other suggestions.  
Not happening in our DEV environment so I'm trying to figure out what the 
difference is (there are probably many).


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: January 7, 2015 2:37 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: Annoying BITS problem

Hmm, this is usually a firewall/proxy issue - I would sniff the traffic with 
Message Analyzer and see what is being sent/received. This is the windows 
return value..

BG_E_INSUFFICIENT_RANGE_SUPPORT (0x80200013)
The server does not support the Content-Range header. Typically, you receive 
this error when you try to download dynamic content. You can also receive this 
error if an intermediate proxy is removing the Content-Range or Content-Length 
header.


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Casey Robertson
Sent: 07 January 2015 01:58
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Annoying BITS problem

This happens to me when running ccmsetup locally from an attempted client 
machine and from a remote Invoke-Command powershell.  Any ideas??  Tried a fix 
that told BITS to run in the foreground by modifying a table in the SUSDB.  
Didn't help.  Turned off ESET AV on SCCM server and client server.  Didn't 
help.  Any ideas??  We use a Palo Alto firewall but both of these systems are 
on the same subnet.

![LOG[Download Update: Connecting to the 
server.]LOG]!time=17:55:30.694+480 date=01-06-2015 component=ccmsetup 
context= type=1 thread=3316 file=ccmsetup.cpp:6586
![LOG[Failed to download files through BITS. Error: 0x80200013, Description 
The server does not support the necessary HTTP protocol. Background Intelligent 
Transfer Service (BITS) requires that the server support the Range protocol 
header.
, Context: The error occurred while the remote file was being processed.
.]LOG]!time=17:55:49.699+480 date=01-06-2015 component=ccmsetup 
context= type=3 thread=3316 file=ccmsetup.cpp:6561
![LOG[Failed to download client files by BITS. Error 
0x80200013]LOG]!time=17:55:49.699+480 date=01-06-2015 
component=ccmsetup context= type=3 thread=3316 file=ccmsetup.cpp:6618

Casey Robertson
Systems Engineer
W 619.878.9099
E casey.robert...@mindbodyonline.commailto:casey.robert...@mindbodyonline.com

MINDBODY, Inc.
4051 Broad Street, Suite 220
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

  [Logo-for-email-signature.jpg] http://www.mindbodyonline.com/

RE: [mssms] Microsoft Ignite hotels

[Phil Wilcock]

Airbnb?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Rod Trent
Sent: 06 January 2015 20:33
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] Microsoft Ignite hotels

Something close by? :)

Most Chicago hotels, particularly the ones selected by Microsoft, are pretty 
good. You can't go wrong with any of them. However, transportation for 
something this large is going to be a nightmare. If you thought Houston was 
tough, Chicago is going to be even more challenging. Get something close to the 
conference center unless you're like me and like to stay within running 
distance.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Ewing, Scott L
Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2015 3:01 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Microsoft Ignite hotels

I have been approved to attend the Microsoft Ignite conference in May. Given 
that the Hyatt Regency McCormick Place is sold out, what hotels do you 
recommend?

[mssms] RE: Deploy PowerShell script

[Phil Wilcock]

Here's the command line I use in the lab within a package/program for PS 
scripts run in SCCM on 64bit Win7/8/8.1 clients and works fine.

powershell.exe -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -NoLogo -NonInteractive -NoProfile 
-WindowStyle Hidden -File C:\temp\wotevs.ps1

cheers

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Kent, Mark
Sent: 06 January 2015 15:18
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Deploy PowerShell script

We are running SCCM 2012 R2 CU1 with Windows 7 64bit clients.  I have a simple 
script that I am trying to deploy as a package/program.  The command line is:

%WINDIR%\Sysnative\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0\powershell.exe -executionpolicy 
Bypass -file .\Remove2010LNK.PS1

If I manually run the script from within powershell, it works fine.  If I 
deploy it from SCCM, it says it runs successfully but I can tell it does not, 
and it also completes in seconds when it should take a couple minutes.  I've 
tried sending it out via a task sequence with the same result, it says it runs 
successfully but it isn't.  The only odd thing I noted in the EXECMGR log is:

Running C:\Windows\sysnative\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0\powershell.exe 
-executionpolicy Bypass -file .\Remove2010LNK.PS1 with 32bitLauncher

Should it still state with 32bitlauncher if I am telling it to use the 64bit 
one?

My last recourse may be to take the script lines and shove it into a CMD batch 
file, but I'd really like to figure out why this isn't working.  Thanks.

Mark Kent (MCP)
Sr. Desktop Systems Engineer
Computing  Technology Services - SUNY Buffalo State

[mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

[Phil Wilcock]

Would be nice if MSFT could update the docs to include this info, as it's a bit 
vague as to what is 'supported' and what isn't.

In this WP - http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=44598 it 
states:


An alternative to using IP Helpers is setting DHCP Options on the DHCP server, 
specifically DHCP Options 60 (PXE Client), 66 (Boot Server Host Name), and 67 
(Boot file Name). However, DHCP Options can be problematic and may not work 
reliably or consistently. Furthermore the use of DHCP Options to control PXE 
requests in Configuration Manager 2012 is not supported by Microsoft. Therefore 
the recommended and supported method of PXE booting client PCs that are on a 
different subnet than the DHCP or WDS/PXE Service Point servers is the use of 
IP Helpers.

But in here 
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc732351(WS.10).aspx#Using it says 
that Microsoft 'does not recommend' this method.

Bottom line here seems to be that it's a bit complicated and therefore we'll 
shift blame over to the HW vendors and not support it. Which is a shame because 
who wants to go to their Network guys and ask them to config  thousands of 
routers?

MS own all the bits here - make em play nice together!

Senior 2Pint

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 06 January 2015 13:11
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

Todd, we were wrong. DCHP server in Server 2012 got something called Policies, 
which can control the response behavior. This means you can control what we 
should reply to who. Just discovered this but think I can get it to send 
different boot loaders to different HW capabilities.

I can definitely set it to send my iPXE boot loader a different TFTP server in 
option 66, so should be doable. If so, I will blog about it.

So I will have to retract my statement, the MS DHCP server is pretty capable.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: den 5 januari 2015 08:18
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

Yeah, MS DHCP is pretty much the same since NT4. I would consider moving of MS 
DHCP to something like ISC since UEFI is unavoidable.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Mote, Todd
Sent: den 5 januari 2015 00:15
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

Yea, I don't think MS DHCP has changed in  quite a while.  It would be nice to 
see an architecture aware update for MS DHCP in Win10 server maybe, but that's 
probably reaching.  I'll defer crossing the UEFI river as long as I can.



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: Sunday, January 4, 2015 1:06 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PXE Service Point from DHCP Scope

Yeah, since the PXE standard is a bit soft around the edges I can see why. It's 
been interesting working with the Linux/*nix PXE people, they taught me a lot 
about this. And they do it all by DHCP, not proxy at all, and never had any 
issues. :-/

But their DHCP servers are way more sophisticated/complicated than MS DHCP. 
Below is an example of ISC DHCP config:


allow bootp;
allow booting;
next-server 10.1.1.2; # core.smidsrod.lan

# Disable ProxyDHCP, we're in control of the primary DHCP server
option ipxe.no-pxedhcp 1;

# Make sure the iPXE we're loading supports what we need,
# if not load a full-featured version
ifexists ipxe.http
  and exists ipxe.menu
  and exists ipxe.nfs
  and ( ( exists ipxe.pxe
  and exists ipxe.bzimage
  and exists ipxe.elf
  and exists ipxe.comboot
  and exists ipxe.iscsi
  ) or (
  exists ipxe.efi
  ) ) {
filename nfs://nas.smidsrod.lan/raid/boot/boot.ipxe;
#filename http://boot.smidsrod.lan/boot.ipxe;;
}
elsif exists user-class and option user-class = iPXE {
# We're already using iPXE, but not a feature-full version,
# and possibly an out-of-date version from ROM, so load a more
# complete version with native drivers
# Allow both legacy BIOS and EFI architectures
if option arch = 00:06 {
filename ipxe-x86.efi;
} elsif option arch = 00:07 {
filename ipxe-x64.efi;
} elsif option arch = 00:00 {
filename ipxe.pxe;
}
}
elsif exists user-class and option user-class = gPXE {
# If someone has an old version of gPXE burned into their ROM,
# load a more recent iPXE
filename ipxe.pxe;
}
elsif option arch = 00:06 {
# EFI 32-bit
# I like to use iPXE-provided drivers, so therefore give ipxe.efi
   

RE: [mssms] RE: [ConfigMgrMVPs] Blogpost: Is Intune going to re place Configuration Manager?

[Phil Wilcock]

Hmm, be great if the user could just carry on working while their machine was 
being upgraded, eh Junior? ☺

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 30 December 2014 18:17
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: [ConfigMgrMVPs] Blogpost: Is Intune going to re place 
Configuration Manager?

Yeah, it was more of a fact that it takes so long that nobody does it, it’s 
quicker to blast the machine and put a new image down.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Hanley, Kevin
Sent: den 30 december 2014 18:56
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: [ConfigMgrMVPs] Blogpost: Is Intune going to re place 
Configuration Manager?

We did an in-place upgrade of Office 2010 to Office 2013 using SCCM:



1.   Communicate/Schedule with users for groups of 50-100 per night (remove 
anyone who opts out from collection)

a.   Instruct laptop users to leave machines in office powered on

2.   Scheduled installs for 8pm (to avoid anyone who is working late and to 
ensure machines have not gone to sleep)

3.   Cancelled deployments if hadn’t kicked off by 4am (to avoid bad 
morning for end user and help desk)

4.   Cached files for Office 2013 (and also Visio and Project 2013 as 
necessary)

5.   Deployed front-end that gave user a 5 min countdown:

a.   Defer for 60 mins

b.  Defer for 10 mins

c.   Run Now

d.  Cancel and Reschedule for later

6.   If User chooses to Run Now (or no user present)

a.   Reboot

b.  Run Office 2010 uninstall

c.   Reboot

d.  Run Office 2013 install

e.  Reboot

7.   Send log file from client along the way to a network share to allow 
monitoring of status (cancelled/deferred/uninstallphase/installphase/errors)

We used hklm\system\setup\cmdline keys to run the uninstall/install similar to 
a Windows Update or Mini-Setup before the user can login (to avoid them 
relaunching Office apps and interfering with install:
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/forums/windows/en-US/b942a34d-c4a7-489c-bb01-45dd65fa9b20/setuptype-and-cmdline-at-hkeylocalmachinesystemsetup


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 12:02 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: [ConfigMgrMVPs] Blogpost: Is Intune going to re place 
Configuration Manager?

precache office then install.

On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Andreas Hammarskjöld 
jun...@2pintsoftware.commailto:jun...@2pintsoftware.com wrote:
So who in here has ever done an in place upgrade of Office? Rebuilt of image is 
always quicker…? Or am I wrong?

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] 
On Behalf Of Kim Oppalfens
Sent: den 29 december 2014 22:33
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: [ConfigMgrMVPs] Blogpost: Is Intune going to re place 
Configuration Manager?

Downside of beta’s, people already make up their mind.
Even if it’s just sentiment, you don’t switch people over from one way of doing 
things to another overnight.
The quickest thing our industry embraced was server virtualization and even 
that took multiple releases, and multiple years before it became the mainstream 
way of implementing servers in production.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of 
rodtr...@myitforum.commailto:rodtr...@myitforum.com
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 9:56 PM
To: SMS
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: [ConfigMgrMVPs] Blogpost: Is Intune going to re place 
Configuration Manager?

People tend to forget that Windows 10 is actually still beta and not even close 
to being finished.

From: Marable, Mikemailto:mmara...@med.umich.edu
Sent: ‎Monday‎, ‎December‎ ‎29‎, ‎2014 ‎3‎:‎47‎ ‎PM
To: SMSmailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com

“Windows 10 will change OS and software deployment…”

I’m sorry but I’d have to beg to differ.  So far I have had little luck with 
using the in-place upgrade that Microsoft is pushing in the real world.  To be 
honest I’m finding it just as problematic as it was in prior versions of 
Windows.  We may be “old school” on this but when the time comes to migrate 
from Windows 7 to Windows 10, as it stands right now we’re going to do it the 
same way we went from XP to Windows 7; using wipe and load task sequences run 
from SCCM.

I would love for all of this to just work and for us to be able to use it.  But 
in healthcare change happens very slowly.  Everything has to have a proven 
track record before we will let patient safety rely on it.

RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

[Phil Wilcock]

OK OK!

Yes I am indeed, sen...@2pintsoftware.commailto:sen...@2pintsoftware.com...

Sadly however, the names do not denote any type of pecking order within the 
company.

Youth of today..sheesh!

Regds, Senior

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 24 December 2014 10:25
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Cc: sen...@2pintsoftware.cm
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

Senior, are you out there? ☺

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: den 23 december 2014 23:05
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

Well said! Why am I not surprised that this came back around to a pub 
metaphor?!?!

I have to ask: Is Phil 
sen...@2pintsoftware.commailto:sen...@2pintsoftware.com?? ☺

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer
1E | Empowering Efficient IT
Mobile: (401) 924-2293
ed.aldr...@1e.commailto:ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.comhttp://www.1e.com/
[Description: Description: cid:image011.png@01CAD56A.EFDE3F90] Ent Cli Mgmt 
(2003-2014)
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 4:24 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

As we spend a lot of time in the pub, drinking 2 Pints, we see people get drunk 
and misbehave every night, some of them are idiots that do it night after 
night, basically picking a fight for the fun of it. They you have some people 
that rarely get drunk but goes bananas from time to time (typical at Xmas 
parties!) and most of them regret it deeply the next day.

This haven’t stopped us from drinking or going to the pub for a free atmosphere 
to discuss things of our liking. We know who not to talk to about certain 
things but don’t back down for a little bit of heated discussions. I see it as 
a loss for the greater community if you can’t ask what you want ant let other 
people learn as well.

Just like we can’t stop the young ones from drinking too much we can’t ban the 
drunkard in the corner, he has to come to his own conclusion that his behavior 
is negative and unconstructive. If we start banning certain topics, where do we 
then draw the line? I’d like to treat it like the pub, only religion and 
politics are off topic. ☺

To end it, here are 2 quotes to end it all that kinda says it all IMHO:


-   “If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we 
don't believe in it at all.”


-   “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit 
the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that 
spectrum”

Happy holidays! ☺

//Andreas

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of 
henry.wil...@sanofi.commailto:henry.wil...@sanofi.com
Sent: den 23 december 2014 18:00
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to All


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 11:19 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

OK, so this thread appears to have now died off quietly without any fireworks, 
which is nice... Mike got his original questions answered, which is most 
important, and *I* managed to keep my mouth shut as well!

That said, and in spite of John’s “I like seeing the question about third party 
add-ins”, I can safely tell you that we at 1E will not answer those questions 
here. Instead we will typically go off-line (as happened here for Mike’s 
answer) if it appears we can help. Why not post publicly here for the benefit 
of all? Simple. It’s been clear for a very long time that this type of thread 
cannot be done here in the (healthy) context John alluded to. It invariably 
goes into the tank every time (and I will state up front that I have been 
guilty of less-than-helpful comments myself in the past). It is hard to refrain 
when someone calls your baby ugly or tries to hijack the thread.

Likewise there are a lot of folks here that flat out do not want to see these 
posts, period. Those sentiments have been made clear on a number of occasions. 
We at 1E, like many others I’m sure, are all here lurking. My colleagues and I 
will try to help where we can, but in a manner that is not disruptive to this 
list (i.e. privately). 

RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

[Phil Wilcock]

Well it’s a shame if those days are gone Ed, it was fun, and we’d like to see 
some fun put back into this business

Now I’m off to the pub, so I’ll bid you good-day!


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: 24 December 2014 14:22
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

Yeah, it’s one thing for the vendors to behave; but, it’s another issue totally 
when the rest of the community (or at least a vocal minority) raise the roof 
every time a vendor makes a post, regardless of how technical or on topic it 
may be Flagrant marketing and self-promotional hype is a totally different 
story of course... As you well know, Senior/Phil, there was a time when vendors 
were able to make these types of tech commentary without adverse repercussions, 
but those days are long gone apparently.

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer
1E | Empowering Efficient IT
Mobile: (401) 924-2293
ed.aldr...@1e.commailto:ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.comhttp://www.1e.com/
[Description: Description: cid:image011.png@01CAD56A.EFDE3F90] Ent Cli Mgmt 
(2003-2014)
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 7:11 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

Oh and yeah, I agree with Junior 2Pint.

Censorship in any form = bad news. Self-policing is the answer, and any 
self-respecting vendor on here should know how to behave ☺

Once you start dictating what people can/can’t say, who knows where it would 
end? Next thing you know you’d have folks telling you which movies you 
can/can’t watch, and we can’t have that can we?

Happy Holidays all

Senior 2Pint

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 24 December 2014 10:25
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Cc: sen...@2pintsoftware.cmmailto:sen...@2pintsoftware.cm
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

Senior, are you out there? ☺

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: den 23 december 2014 23:05
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

Well said! Why am I not surprised that this came back around to a pub 
metaphor?!?!

I have to ask: Is Phil 
sen...@2pintsoftware.commailto:sen...@2pintsoftware.com?? ☺

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer
1E | Empowering Efficient IT
Mobile: (401) 924-2293
ed.aldr...@1e.commailto:ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.comhttp://www.1e.com/
[Description: Description: cid:image011.png@01CAD56A.EFDE3F90] Ent Cli Mgmt 
(2003-2014)
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 4:24 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: Using 1E Nomad during OSD Task Sequences

As we spend a lot of time in the pub, drinking 2 Pints, we see people get drunk 
and misbehave every night, some of them are idiots that do it night after 
night, basically picking a fight for the fun of it. They you have some people 
that rarely get drunk but goes bananas from time to time (typical at Xmas 
parties!) and most of them regret it deeply the next day.

This haven’t stopped us from drinking or going to the pub for a free atmosphere 
to discuss things of our liking. We know who not to talk to about certain 
things but don’t back down for a little bit of heated discussions. I see it as 
a loss for the greater community if you can’t ask what you want ant let other 
people learn as well.

Just like we can’t stop the young ones from drinking too much we can’t ban the 
drunkard in the corner, he has to come to his own conclusion that his behavior 
is negative and unconstructive. If we start banning certain topics, where do we 
then draw the line? I’d like to treat it like the pub, only religion and 
politics are off topic. ☺

To end it, here are 2 quotes to end it all that kinda says it all IMHO:


-   “If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we 
don't believe in it at all.”


-   “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit 
the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that 
spectrum”

Happy holidays! ☺

//Andreas

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com

[mssms] RE: Jeeeez it's quiet here these days...

[Phil Wilcock]

hmm, is it rude to start drinking this early.in bed?

Btw -  It's Have all the Europeans left...tsk

//P
http://2PintSoftware.com


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 18 December 2014 08:53
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Jz it's quiet here these days...

... Is it too early to start drinking?

Has all the Europeans left for xmas?

//A
http://2PintSoftware.com

[mssms] RE: Package Download What is the priority?

[Phil Wilcock]

'Don't mention the war!' :)

I would fire Anita for using a non-authorised OS version, and go to the pub 
'til it all blows over..it is Christmas after all..

Phil
http://2pintsoftware.com

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: den 17 december 2014 17:59
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Package Download  What is the priority?

Hi,

So this is not a QoS questions, more of what makes sense question. So let say 
you have a branch and during a day there are a few downloads going on. If there 
is only one download, it's not so bad, it will take the time that bandwidth 
allows, QoS policy provides or third party detects as free bandwidth.

But let's say you got the following doing on in a typical branch office a day 
before Santa gets here:


1.   One technician is building a brand new box in typical panic mode so 
it's downloading in WinPE and the end user is eagerly waiting to start working.

2.   It's a Wednesday morning so a few systems are still downloading their 
1.2 GB patches of the month bundle.

3.   At the same time, the branch manager decides to upgrade his finance 
app.

4.   Old Anita in the corner that nobody talks to since she runs Vista and 
likes it actually decides to upgrade her machine using an OS push to upgrade to 
Windows 7.

5.   In the good ol' HQ the SECURITY people decides to emergency push KB 
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/261186 to all the machines in the enterprise, 
nothing is more important.

You get the drift, is it worth doing one DL at the or should the all (in 
typical Swedish social democratic way) share the load and all wait. Or should 
Anita get priority as she is running Vista?

Joking aside, what's your view of how it should work?

//Andreas

RE: [mssms] Jeeeez it's quiet here these days...

[Phil Wilcock]

My wife wins..17 weeks PAID holiday..(private school)

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of LEROY Mathieu
Sent: 18 December 2014 12:29
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] Jz it's quiet here these days...

4 to 5 weeks (very rare, mostly government employees) in France.

Stereotypes and preconceptions are alive and well I see ;)

De : listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] De la part de Andreas Hammarskjöld
Envoyé : jeudi 18 décembre 2014 13:10
À : mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Objet : RE: [mssms] Jz it's quiet here these days...

I wouldn’t get out the pub for 2 weeks…  ☺

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Peter Huiskens
Sent: den 18 december 2014 12:59
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com'
Subject: RE: [mssms] Jz it's quiet here these days...

That’s too bad.
 most of us have a total of 5 to 6 weeks per year.  ( Netherlands)
Not 3 months.  Only teachers have a lot.
However, 2 weeks is not much.




From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell
Sent: 18 December 2014 10:52
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] Jz it's quiet here these days...

lol. Europeons never work. You guys get what, 3 months of holiday every year 
where we idiots only get a week or 2 if we are lucky.



On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Andreas Hammarskjöld 
jun...@2pintsoftware.commailto:jun...@2pintsoftware.com wrote:
… Is it too early to start drinking?

Has all the Europeans left for xmas?

//A
http://2PintSoftware.com

RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck

[Phil Wilcock]

Oh, interesting debate guys! Love it.

The fact is I agree with some or all of both arguments (I should work for the 
UN)

BranchCache has a bad rep, the docs from MS don't help, but the picture is 
improving, and will continue to do so. BITS is, in my opinion, the piece that 
needs more work. BranchCache is after all an API that pretty much does a great 
job of Peer Caching if it's used correctly, and has improved greatly - even 
between Windows 8-8.1.
BITS needs a kick in the ass in terms of the way SCCM uses it - but remember 
that BITS is used by over 600Million desktops every day so it's not going away 
either. There are some enhancements coming that will make the 
BITS/BranchCache/SCCM story a lot more attractive.


And yeah I'm pretty sure that BranchCache hashes are lost on Server 2008 
reboots - hey, there should be an app for that right Andreas? ;-)

Cheers

Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: 05 December 2014 09:41
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck

Too little, sleep all confused... BranchCache wasn't even in 2008, so it has to 
be R2. But pretty sure that was tested, anyhow will give it a kick and get back 
to you.

//A

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: den 5 december 2014 08:19
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck

Really? I think we tested that, but it could have been 2008 R2, will check 2008 
and update if that it's the case. Good find!

//Andreas

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Roland Janus
Sent: den 5 december 2014 00:21
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck

How about a comment on this from your site:

Are Hashes Lost If The Server Reboots?
That's a lie, floating around on some websites, hashes are kept over reboots. 
So you can reboot as much as you like.
That's exactly what I saw on Server 2008. Every reboot and it had to download 
again. It does happen. On Server 2008.

-R


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Hammarskjöld
Sent: Donnerstag, 4. Dezember 2014 23:27
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck

Yeah, that old chestnut! Not only does that whitepaper have a lot of 
misconceptions/confusion on how BranchCache works, with the upcoming 
BranchCache for OSD pretty much all of those arguments fall. And then we 
haven't even covered the points where BranchCache kick butts! :)

Once we got BranchCache for OSD 1.0 out the door we will make an updated 
whitepaper. And yeah, did I mention its free? :)

//Andreas

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Troy Martin
Sent: den 4 december 2014 22:59
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck

If you're seriously considering BranchCache as the alternate content provider 
for your organization, be sure to do your homework, by first reading a white 
paper Paul Thomsen has written:

http://www.1e.com/blog/all_resources/branchcache-right-organisation/

In the white paper, we look at the key reasons why BranchCache is not suitable 
for SCCM content distribution and examine why the expectation that BranchCache 
could be appropriate for SCCM content distribution should be questioned and 
compared to alternatives before deploying in your organization. The paper also 
reviews how BranchCache works, how it has changed over the years, and where to 
learn more.

So while BranchCache works, the bigger question is whether it's right for 
your organization's needs.

Again, do your homework first...

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 4, 2014, at 8:53 AM, Andreas Hammarskjöld 
jun...@2pintsoftware.commailto:jun...@2pintsoftware.com wrote:
Even better, use BranchCache since its free and works great?

//Andreas

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Magnus Tveten
Sent: den 4 december 2014 04:03
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Distribution Bottleneck

AdaptivaOnesite is really good to... the way it uses the network without 
interfering with anything.

We used that to push Win7 Image (+ all the needed software packages) to 
machines at all the different sites with very small links and not once did 
anyone from the business find the network slow..




MAGNUS TVETEN
SERVER SUPPORT 

RE: [mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for content option is checked

[Phil Wilcock]

True! Only been tested it against packages and TS’s..didn’t notice that..

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Eswar Koneti
Sent: 26 October 2014 01:45
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked

This is only for legacy packages but not for packages created using new 
application model.

Regards,
Eswar Koneti
www.eskonr.comhttp://www.eskonr.com
Sent from Mobile Device, excuse any typo's as a result.

--- Original Message ---

From: Phil Wilcock ph...@2pintsoftware.commailto:ph...@2pintsoftware.com
Sent: October 26, 2014 5:51 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked

You can use this bit of SQL too – checks the AdvertFlags to see if that bit is 
flipped…



SELECT

  ad.AdvertisementID,

  ad.AdvertisementName,

  AdvertFlags,

  (AdvertFlags  0x0002)/0x0002 AS DONOT_FALLBACK

FROM dbo.v_Advertisement ad





Of course if the result is a 1 the checkbox is empty as it’s DONOT_FALLBACK



From this great article… - 
http://myitforum.com/cs2/blogs/jnelson/archive/2011/06/21/158110.aspx



Cheers, Phil



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Johns, Damon (DoJ)
Sent: 24 October 2014 21:51
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked



Thanks Daniel,



That’s what I was after, Cheers!



Damon



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Ratliff
Sent: Friday, 24 October 2014 11:47 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked



Looks like its in the DeploymentType XML. Just a start, but should get you what 
you need.



Get-CMDeploymentType -ApplicationName Captivate | select -expand 
SDMPackageXML | out-file c:\temp\xml.xml



FallbackToUnprotectedDPtrue/FallbackToUnprotectedDP



Daniel Ratliff



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Ratliff
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 8:25 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked



I am pretty sure that is available in the native CM cmdlets. Ill check…



Daniel Ratliff



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Johns, Damon (DoJ)
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 12:08 AM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com'
Subject: [mssms] PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked



Hi Everyone,



Has anyone written a Powershell script to check if the option “Allow clients to 
use a fallback source location for content” is enabled or not? I need to check 
if anyone has enabled this option or not for reporting purposes and I don’t 
really want to go through each of my 350 odd apps.



Any assistance would be greatly appreciated!



Cheers

__

Damon Johns  |  Senior IT Officer

IT Services  |  Department of Justice  |

•Executive BuildingLevel 4, 15 Murray StreetHOBART  TAS  7001

•p:  03 616 53492  |   m:  0417 386 022

• damon.jo...@justice.tas.gov.aumailto:damon.jo...@justice.tas.gov.au







CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
The information in this transmission may be confidential and/or protected by 
legal professional privilege, and is intended only for the person or persons to 
whom it is addressed. If you are not such a person, you are warned that any 
disclosure, copying or dissemination of the information is unauthorised. If you 
have received the transmission in error, please immediately contact this office 
by telephone, fax or email, to inform us of the error and to enable 
arrangements to be made for the destruction of the transmission, or its return 
at our cost. No liability is accepted for any unauthorised use of the 
information contained in this transmission.



The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed
and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information 
in error,
please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.



The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed
and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information 
in error,
please

[mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for content option is checked

[Phil Wilcock]

You can use this bit of SQL too - checks the AdvertFlags to see if that bit is 
flipped...

SELECT
  ad.AdvertisementID,
  ad.AdvertisementName,
  AdvertFlags,
  (AdvertFlags  0x0002)/0x0002 AS DONOT_FALLBACK
FROM dbo.v_Advertisement ad


Of course if the result is a 1 the checkbox is empty as it's DONOT_FALLBACK

From this great article... - 
http://myitforum.com/cs2/blogs/jnelson/archive/2011/06/21/158110.aspx

Cheers, Phil

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Johns, Damon (DoJ)
Sent: 24 October 2014 21:51
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked

Thanks Daniel,

That's what I was after, Cheers!

Damon

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Ratliff
Sent: Friday, 24 October 2014 11:47 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked

Looks like its in the DeploymentType XML. Just a start, but should get you what 
you need.

Get-CMDeploymentType -ApplicationName Captivate | select -expand 
SDMPackageXML | out-file c:\temp\xml.xml

FallbackToUnprotectedDPtrue/FallbackToUnprotectedDP

Daniel Ratliff

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Ratliff
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 8:25 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.commailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked

I am pretty sure that is available in the native CM cmdlets. Ill check...

Daniel Ratliff

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Johns, Damon (DoJ)
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 12:08 AM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com'
Subject: [mssms] PoSH script to check if Fallback source locations for 
content option is checked

Hi Everyone,

Has anyone written a Powershell script to check if the option Allow clients to 
use a fallback source location for content is enabled or not? I need to check 
if anyone has enabled this option or not for reporting purposes and I don't 
really want to go through each of my 350 odd apps.

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated!

Cheers
__
Damon Johns  |  Senior IT Officer
IT Services  |  Department of Justice  |
*Executive BuildingLevel 4, 15 Murray StreetHOBART  TAS  7001
*p:  03 616 53492  |   m:  0417 386 022
* damon.jo...@justice.tas.gov.aumailto:damon.jo...@justice.tas.gov.au




CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
The information in this transmission may be confidential and/or protected by 
legal professional privilege, and is intended only for the person or persons to 
whom it is addressed. If you are not such a person, you are warned that any 
disclosure, copying or dissemination of the information is unauthorised. If you 
have received the transmission in error, please immediately contact this office 
by telephone, fax or email, to inform us of the error and to enable 
arrangements to be made for the destruction of the transmission, or its return 
at our cost. No liability is accepted for any unauthorised use of the 
information contained in this transmission.


The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed
and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information 
in error,
please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.


The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed
and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information 
in error,
please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.




CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
The information in this transmission may be confidential and/or protected by 
legal professional privilege, and is intended only for the person or persons to 
whom it is addressed. If you are not such a person, you are warned that any 
disclosure, copying or dissemination of the information is unauthorised. If you 
have received the transmission in error, please immediately contact this office 
by telephone, fax or email, to inform us of the error and to enable 
arrangements to be made for the destruction of the transmission, or its return 
at our cost. No liability is accepted for any unauthorised use of the 
information contained in this transmission.

Re: [mssms] OT: MMS...

[Phil Wilcock]

unsub

From: Rod Trent 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 6:25 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com 
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

Ed’s doing the Wrecking Ball song at the myITforum party.

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of henry.wil...@sanofi.com
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 1:19 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

Is this a Justin Bieber concert?   ;)

 

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 1:13 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

Pool is open: I’m betting “Sold Out” in 24hrs or less

 

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer

1E | Empowering Efficient IT

Mobile: (401) 924-2293

ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.com

 Ent Cli Mgmt (2003-2014)

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Brian Mason
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 12:24 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

Registration just opened!  Limited to 500 attendees so you shouldn't delay.

 

_

Brian Mason

MCTS, MS MVP ECM

http://www.mnscug.org/

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of henry.wil...@sanofi.com
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 10:01 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

2 Thumbs UP!

 

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 10:36 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

This is huge. What you see here is our “community” taking back what was once 
ours and was eventually lost, bringing us back to the roots of the very first 
“SMS Conference” paradigm back in the late ‘90’s. While this attendance is 
limited to only 500 people, the long term vision is to prevail upon other 
visionary User Group leaders just like Brian to reprise this event in other 
locations around the country. In this way, we can bring popular speakers and 
topics to “a group near you” over the course of time.

 

What Brian and his supporting resources are doing here in this first event 
should provide a model that hopefully can be duplicated in other cities so that 
other group leaders don’t have to reinvent the wheel every time. We at 1E are 
committed to supporting this effort wherever the opportunity arises and in 
whatever way we can.

 

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer

1E | Empowering Efficient IT

Mobile: (401) 924-2293

ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.com

 Ent Cli Mgmt (2003-2014)

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 

 

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of rodtr...@myitforum.com
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 7:59 AM
To: SMS
Subject: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

For those wondering about Brian’s signature the past week or so…

 

http://mms.mnscug.org/ 

 

Sent from my Surface Pro 3

 

 

 






DISCLAIMER: This is a PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL message for the ordinary user of 
this email address. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete 
without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in delivery. 
NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind 1E to any 
order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or 
government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such purpose.

 

 

 

 

 

Re: [mssms] OT: MMS...

[Phil Wilcock]

party like it’s (MMS) 1999 Ed!

From: Ed Aldrich 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 6:33 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com 
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

In costume, to boot... new era to replace The Red Purse

 

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer

1E | Empowering Efficient IT

Mobile: (401) 924-2293

ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.com

 Ent Cli Mgmt (2003-2014)

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Rod Trent
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 1:25 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

Ed’s doing the Wrecking Ball song at the myITforum party.

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of henry.wil...@sanofi.com
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 1:19 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

Is this a Justin Bieber concert?   ;)

 

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 1:13 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

Pool is open: I’m betting “Sold Out” in 24hrs or less

 

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer

1E | Empowering Efficient IT

Mobile: (401) 924-2293

ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.com

 Ent Cli Mgmt (2003-2014)

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Brian Mason
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 12:24 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

Registration just opened!  Limited to 500 attendees so you shouldn't delay.

 

_

Brian Mason

MCTS, MS MVP ECM

http://www.mnscug.org/

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of henry.wil...@sanofi.com
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 10:01 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

2 Thumbs UP!

 

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 10:36 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

This is huge. What you see here is our “community” taking back what was once 
ours and was eventually lost, bringing us back to the roots of the very first 
“SMS Conference” paradigm back in the late ‘90’s. While this attendance is 
limited to only 500 people, the long term vision is to prevail upon other 
visionary User Group leaders just like Brian to reprise this event in other 
locations around the country. In this way, we can bring popular speakers and 
topics to “a group near you” over the course of time.

 

What Brian and his supporting resources are doing here in this first event 
should provide a model that hopefully can be duplicated in other cities so that 
other group leaders don’t have to reinvent the wheel every time. We at 1E are 
committed to supporting this effort wherever the opportunity arises and in 
whatever way we can.

 

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer

1E | Empowering Efficient IT

Mobile: (401) 924-2293

ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.com

 Ent Cli Mgmt (2003-2014)

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 

 

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of rodtr...@myitforum.com
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 7:59 AM
To: SMS
Subject: [mssms] OT: MMS...

 

For those wondering about Brian’s signature the past week or so…

 

http://mms.mnscug.org/ 

 

Sent from my Surface Pro 3

 

 

 






DISCLAIMER: This is a PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL message for the ordinary user of 
this email address. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete 
without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in delivery. 
NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind 1E to any 
order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or 
government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such purpose.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Re: [mssms] Microsoft's Wally Mead Joins Cireson as Principal Program Manager

[Phil Wilcock]

or it’ll just be renamed MobileCloudEd 

From: henry.wil...@sanofi.com 
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 7:38 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com 
Subject: RE: [mssms] Microsoft's Wally Mead Joins Cireson as Principal Program 
Manager

And..  I’ll bet TechEd will be circling the drain soon   L

 

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Christopher Mosby
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 2:13 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] Microsoft's Wally Mead Joins Cireson as Principal Program 
Manager

 

This is what happens when you cancel MMS…

 

Thanks,

Chris

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Rod Trent
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 11:34 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] Microsoft's Wally Mead Joins Cireson as Principal Program 
Manager

 

You can catch him at TechEd in the ILLs, and also the Day5 event.

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Anoop C Nair
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 11:51 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Microsoft's Wally Mead Joins Cireson as Principal Program 
Manager

 

www.prweb.com/releases/wallymead/cireson/prweb11810342.htm

 

 

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are 
intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message, 
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or 
distribution 
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please 
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.

 

Re: [mssms] IT/Dev Connection

[Phil Wilcock]

..and whether you want to go to Houston..or Vegas!

For me TechEd is looking more and more like a waste of time if you’re in the 
System Center space.

From: Ed Aldrich 
Sent: Tuesday, March 4, 2014 3:38 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com 
Subject: RE: [mssms] IT/Dev Connection

Unfortunately, all but two of the CfgMgr MVP’s were declined (Johan and Kent in 
a shared session I believe). I’ve also heard of a similar situation in Exchange 
and Office 365.

 

But, back to the original question re: IT/DEV Connection (disclaimer: I was not 
there, so 2nd hand info here) last September: There was a short planning cycle 
available to expand it to include CfgMgr content (coincided with Rod’s joining 
Penton Publishing I believe). Even with the short lead time, I heard a lot of 
very positive comments about the content delivered.

 

This year of course will be dramatically different, having a full year between 
events, with the goal of heavy CfgMgr content being a core part of the 
conference. It’s my personal opinion, based on both TechEd session review 
involvement and back room discussions around IT/Dev planning, that the latter 
conference will be a significant event for the members of this community. Once 
the respective session lists (and related levels) are public it should be easy 
to decide which is the better choice for you personally. It will all come down 
to what your personal needs are.

 

Ed Aldrich

Mobile: (401) 924-2293

ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.com

 Ent Cli Mgmt (2003-2014)

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Michael Niehaus
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 4:45 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] IT/Dev Connection

 

TechEd’s session list will go live tomorrow, and will include plenty of MVPs 
and other external speakers.  (The selection process takes quite a while with 
the huge number of session submissions received, and they choose not to publish 
it until all the speakers accept their slots, just in case anyone declines.)

 

Thanks,

-Michael

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Rod Trent
Sent: Monday, March 3, 2014 1:09 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] IT/Dev Connection

 

Considering that TechEd’s session list has yet to make it out with two months 
before the event, I think we’ll actually do pretty good. J

 

Call for sessions/speakers should go live late this week or early next week.  
Of course, we have to give a submission deadline, but we’ll dig straight into 
the sessions right away and have a finished product in a couple weeks’ time.  
I’d guess that the session/speaker list will be ready by mid-April if not 
sooner. That’s still a good 5 months before the event kicks off.

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Fritzroy Guillot
Sent: Monday, March 3, 2014 4:02 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] IT/Dev Connection

 

When will you have a good idea of what the content will be and who will be 
presenting? Also will you know in enough time before the early bird special 
expires?

 
 
 
-Fritzroy


 




From: rodtr...@myitforum.com
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] IT/Dev Connection
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 15:58:10 -0500

Some good CM/OSD sessions last year.

 

There will definitely a lot more this year since none of the MVPs made the cut 
for TechEd.

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Fritzroy Guillot
Sent: Monday, March 3, 2014 3:51 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] IT/Dev Connection

 

How was this conference last year from an Configuration Manager perpestive? 
Wondering if it would be worth going to this year?

 
 
 
-Fritzroy

 

 

 

 

 






DISCLAIMER: This is a PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL message for the ordinary user of 
this email address. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete 
without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in delivery. 
NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind 1E to any 
order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or 
government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such purpose.




image001.png

Re: [mssms] RE: Software True-up reporting questions

[Phil Wilcock]

might as well throw this in 

We have C-SAM – Cloud based, and pretty low cost if you only want to do some MS 
true-up stuff. Connects your SCCM DB to our Azure based 
normalization/recognition service so our guys do all the leg work and you get a 
link to some lovely reports. 

http://services.atea.com/services_uk/services/cloud-software-asset-management.aspx
 

ta

Best Regards,

Phil Wilcock








Atea Global Services
Krokslätts Fabriker 14
431 37 Mölndal, Sweden
www.ateaglobal.com

www.ateasolutions.info 









The Atea Group is the leading Nordic and Baltic supplier of IT infrastructure 
products and services. Business areas span in all the IT value chain from 
hardware and software to service, outsourcing, project management, 
installation, infrastructure, operations and education. The Group has 
approximately 6000 employees and is present in 79 cities in Norway, Sweden, 
Denmark, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. The Group has revenue of 
approximately EUR 2.3 billion. The company is listed on the Oslo Stock 
Exchange. 






From: Ed Aldrich 
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 4:56 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com 
Subject: [mssms] RE: Software True-up reporting questions

“...Procurement won’t be asking me for licensing reports anymore”

 

BRILLIANT!!

 

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer

1E | Empowering Efficient IT

Mobile: (401) 924-2293

ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.com

 Ent Cli Mgmt (2003-2013))

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Lindenfeld, Ivan
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 11:53 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: Software True-up reporting questions

 

I always ran the built in Asset Intelligence reports, but you have to plan 
ahead to enable the feature.

 

They don’t work well for accuracy, but for reporting Microsoft licenses to 
Microsoft, as long as they are inaccurate in your favor, hey, you’re using a 
Microsoft product so they can’t complain.

 

We recently purchased a normalization suite, Provance.  I have no feedback 
except that Procurement won’t be asking me for licensing reports anymore, it’s 
on their side of the fence now.  It uses SCCM data.

 

I have an Office SQL query that I stole from Marcum and edited a bit.  It 
essentially already has the list of odd product names figured in.  Since he’s 
in the thread, let’s see if he has a later version of that report otherwise 
I’ll shoot you my revision.

 

Ivan Lindenfeld

Sr. Systems Engineer

Enterprise Deployment / SCCM

Fidelity National Financial | Jacksonville, Florida

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Ed Aldrich
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 11:45 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: Software True-up reporting questions

 

...and I typically use AppClarity.

 

Ed Aldrich | Solutions Engineer

1E | Empowering Efficient IT

Mobile: (401) 924-2293

ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.com

 Ent Cli Mgmt (2003-2013))

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Marcum, John
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 11:32 AM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com'
Subject: [mssms] RE: Software True-up reporting questions

 

Some type of normalization software. Personally I use BDNA. 

 




John Marcum
Sr. Desktop Architect

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP




 

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Kevin Johnston
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 10:29 AM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com'
Subject: [mssms] Software True-up reporting questions

 

I have been asked to provide a list of software for Microsoft True-up. I don’t 
have any custom reports, I am just running the basic report on all software 
then finding the typical (Visio and Project).

 

I have 2 issues that I am wondering how most admins deal with this.

 

1.   Old data – if the software was installed on a machine and has been 
repurposed or decommissioned the data is still In the data base, so how to you 
filter out what is really accurate and what is old data?

2.   Microsoft feels the need to name the same product a few different ways 
(Microsoft Office Visio 2010, Microsoft Visio 2010) but it seems the machines 
are the same in both reports, which tells me it’s just a naming thing.

 

I think my best interest is maybe finding a custom report that will give me 
this info.

 

So I ask, how do you deal with software true-up reports?

 

Thanks,

 

Kevin Johnston

 

 





Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be protected