none
SCCM 2012 SP1 implementation and question around Dedicated SUP

    Question

  • All,

    I'm about to start implementing SCCM 2012 SP1 in production environment, currently running this in Lab environment but have come across 3 issues that I need some help with.  I do mention SP1 implementation but I think they are more general issues not really related to SP1, just to be clear.

    Question 1

    Software Updates.  I've selected the products/classifications and when the updates run, it does completed however for 40+ updates I get following message:  "Update 42c1601b-a2b5-4e98-8a6e-9d030998435d not synced due to pending EULA download SMS_WSUS_SYNC_MANAGER 12/30/2012 7:15:48 AM 11532 (0x2D0C)"

    Looking at this a bit more in details this is referrring to updates for Office XP; Visio 2002, SharePoint etc....    It does retry every hour, however it does come back with same errors.  Any ideas suggestions?

    Question 2

    I've got Hierarchy of CAS and 3 Primary sites.  Our design is build that every SCCM Role will be running on dedicated servers, and here is now the question. What is the correct setup for WSUS and SUP role. 

    I've got WSUS/SUP configured on the CAS and thats working fine, with exception of previous error.

    I've got dedicated machine running for WSUS and installed SUP Role on this.

    Reading documentation it does mention that each primary site does need to have a Active SUP.  Does this imply I would still need to install WSUS/SUP role on my primary server?   I've tried installating the WSUS 3.0SP2 Admin console + 2 patches, however checking the WCM.log it does complain that "Remote Configuration failed on WSUS server"  I would like to avoid at all cost having to install WSUS also on the primary server, ideal solution would be to install the SUP role on the Primary Server but somehow have it configured to use teh remote WSUS Server.

    Question 3

    with installation of SP1, if you want to install the SUP Role, it does require that you install 2 additional patches for the WSUS system.

    WSUS-KB2720211-x64.exe and WSUS-KB2734608-x64.exe   the first patch does install without any issues however for the second patch I run into problem that it cannot update certain assembly and hence the update fails.  I've managed to fix this by doing clean install of my WSUS and apply both patches but ensure that the "Update Services" and "World Wide Web Publishing Service" where stopped prior to install the last patch, that fixed the issue on 1 server, however I still have issue with 1 primary server.

    any ideas suggestions would be helpfull.

    Sunday, December 30, 2012 12:55 PM

All replies

  • I'm about to start implementing SCCM 2012 SP1 in production environment

    SP1 has not reached general availability and is not available via MVLS; you are not allowed to use your MSD/TechNet media to upgrade/install a production environment.

    1. That is a WSUS issue that typically involves running wsusutil reset: http://blogs.technet.com/b/sus/archive/2008/08/26/missing-end-user-license-agreement-eula-will-cause-error-0x80240033-in-the-updateshandler-log.aspx

    2. As it explicitly states, each primary site needs a SUP to deploy updates to the systems managed by that site (note that in SP1 there is no longer an active SUP). The SUP role must be installed on a system with an instance of WSUS fully installed -- there is no other choice. This can be on the primary site server or a site system. What would the point of have WSUS and the SUP separated be? The SUP is basically just a thin layer of management and communication over WSUS.

    3. No, these updates are not explicitly required as they address issues only encountered when using a stand-alone WSUS instance (except for the SCUP issue); however, there is no harm in installing these and no explicit reason not to install them.


    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com

    Sunday, December 30, 2012 9:00 PM
  • I'm about to start implementing SCCM 2012 SP1 in production environment

    SP1 has not reached general availability and is not available via MVLS; you are not allowed to use your MSD/TechNet media to upgrade/install a production environment.

    1. That is a WSUS issue that typically involves running wsusutil reset: http://blogs.technet.com/b/sus/archive/2008/08/26/missing-end-user-license-agreement-eula-will-cause-error-0x80240033-in-the-updateshandler-log.aspx

    2. As it explicitly states, each primary site needs a SUP to deploy updates to the systems managed by that site (note that in SP1 there is no longer an active SUP). The SUP role must be installed on a system with an instance of WSUS fully installed -- there is no other choice. This can be on the primary site server or a site system. What would the point of have WSUS and the SUP separated be? The SUP is basically just a thin layer of management and communication over WSUS.

    3. No, these updates are not explicitly required as they address issues only encountered when using a stand-alone WSUS instance (except for the SCUP issue); however, there is no harm in installing these and no explicit reason not to install them.


    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com

    Hi,

    Why are admins not allowed to install SP1 in a prod environment until GA?

    Wednesday, January 02, 2013 12:07 PM
  • Because of the license agreements of MSDN and Technet software ...

    Torsten Meringer | http://www.mssccmfaq.de

    Wednesday, January 02, 2013 12:10 PM
    Moderator
  • Hi Jason,

    thx for the quick reply some updates from my part on the issues

    Issues1:  I've temporarily taken out the Office patches, and then the sync did complete successful.  I've got small dev environment with identical setup, and have not seen this issue, I will try to run this wsusutil command as described in the blog.

    Issue2:  Maybe I did not ask the question correctly, but what I'm trying to achieve is to separate the role(s) and use individual servers for these roles.  I've managed to make this work, however I needed to do the following:

    Primary Site server, I did install the WSUS Console (Only the console).  On my dedicated system I did install full WSUS + SUP Role. This is now working as expected, I can see the SUP in my monitoring and they sync happily with my CAS Server.

    Issue3:  You actually need to install these 2 patches, otherwise you cannot install the SUP role, as it looks for these as requirement, if they are not available the SUP role will not install.

    extract from the SUP Log file

    <12/30/12 16:54:13> Installing the SMSWSUS
    <12/30/12 16:54:13> Checking for supported version of WSUS (min WSUS 3.0 SP2 + KB2720211 + KB2734608)
    <12/30/12 16:54:13> Checking runtime v2.0.50727...
    <12/30/12 16:54:13> Found supported assembly Microsoft.UpdateServices.Administration version 3.1.6001.1, file version 3.1.7600.256
    <12/30/12 16:54:13> Found supported assembly Microsoft.UpdateServices.BaseApi version 3.1.6001.1, file version 3.1.7600.256
    <12/30/12 16:54:13> Supported WSUS version found
    <12/30/12 16:54:13> Supported WSUS Server version (3.1.7600.256) is installed.
    <12/30/12 16:54:13> CTool::RegisterManagedBinary: run command line: "C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v2.0.50727\RegAsm.exe" "G:\SMS\bin\x64\wsusmsp.dll"
    <12/30/12 16:54:44> CTool::RegisterManagedBinary: Registered G:\SMS\bin\x64\wsusmsp.dll successfully
    <12/30/12 16:54:44> Registered DLL G:\SMS\bin\x64\wsusmsp.dll
    <12/30/12 16:54:44> Installation was successful.
    <12/30/12 16:54:44> ~RoleSetup().

    Wednesday, January 02, 2013 3:00 PM
  • To expand on Torsten's answer, TechNet and MSDN licenses and software are explicitly for development, testing, and/or lab environments only.

    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com

    Wednesday, January 02, 2013 4:23 PM
  • Interesting on the supported version, that must be new for SP1 final.

    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com

    Wednesday, January 02, 2013 4:26 PM
  • Just to be clear, this is currently testing environment where I'm implementing the SCCM 2012 SP1.   Question I have, what is the difference in version between TechNet-MSDN/GA.  When asking our customer to provide us with the license keys for the product, they did provide me with the same key as I'm using today for my MSDN ????   They even clarified this with the MS Account manager and he indeed confirmed that these where the right keys to use for the production environment.  

    MS is aware about this implementation as they provided consultancy services for the design.  Information we got back from MS is following.  this is about System Center Configuration Manager 2012

    System Center 2012

    Volume License Key (if applicable)

    Setup Keys

    How do I get my key?

    Setup keys are used for each product/version combination to "unlock" the product and will bypass activation.

    There are three ways to obtain setup keys:

    • Physical      fulfillment. For products acquired through physical fulfillment, the setup      key is printed on the media sleeve.
    • Download      fulfillment. For products acquired by download, the setup key is provided      with the download. rganization.
    • For products that are available for      download from the Microsoft Volume Licensing Service Center (VLSC)      website, the setup key is provided on the download screen and may be      accompanied with the following text: "Some products available for      download require setup keys. Please take note of this setup key as it will      be needed during product installation."

    The key that the customer has from the "Microsoft Volume Licensing Service Center", is the same key as I have from MSDN.

    Wednesday, January 02, 2013 4:52 PM
  • To my knowledge, there is no technical difference. It's not about the license key, its about the license which are two completely different things and as Torsten stated above, the EULA which explicitly states that the software is not for production environments. Only software downloaded directly from the MVLS/VLSC is for production use regardless of technical differences and/or keys.

    Also, no Account Manager can trump the EULA.

    For additional reference: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/hr/configmanagergeneral/thread/71f7b7f5-bc28-4167-a8de-e08adedb065a


    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com

    Wednesday, January 02, 2013 8:33 PM