locked
Client Interoperability 2007/2012 RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi,

    I read a lot of Technet documentation and several blogs and I think that I understand, but just want to confirm with someone that has experience with this scenario.

    I have a standalone 2007 hierarchy (1 primary site, 4 secondary sites and 1,000 clients).

    • the client agent was installed on the managed systems with the parameter SMSSITECODE=AUTO

    Now, I'm getting ready to setup a new hierarchy for 2012R2, but due to the network config, I cannot break the subnet into multiple boundary groups to avoid overlapping boundaries. Each location has a single subnet with a network switch... Servers and workstations have IP addresses inside the same subnet. I don't want to be excluding specific IPs from the 2007 Boundaries and moving them to the 2012 Boundary Groups on a one by one basis.

    The 2012 hierarchy is identical; 1 primary site, 4 secondary sites and 1,000 clients. There's a reason for the secondary sites instead of DPs...

    1) It is my understanding that the AUTO site code provided to the ccmsetup.exe is only used for the initial site assignment after the client agent installation; for the client to be managed. This was done when the 2007 client agent was installed. After the site was automatically assignment, the clients now show as being assign to the 2007 site (e.g. P07). 

    Question #1: Is this assumption correct? After the client does the initial site assignment, the AUTO parameter is no longer used.

    If yes, then I can just change the ccmsetup.exe parameter "SMSSITECODE=P07" for future installs of clients that should continue to get assigned to CM 2007...

    2) It is my understanding that I can also assign the site code for the new 2012 clients (ccmsetup.exe parameter "SMSSITECODE=P12") to ensure they are assigned to the 2012 site and NOT to the 2007 site.

    From what I read, the CM 2012 client agent avoids the 2007 site, but the CM 2007 client agent doesn't avoid 2012 the site.

    3) When the CM 2012 hierarchy is fully configured:

    • the 2012 site code (P12) will be different from the CM 2007 site code (P07)
    • the boundary groups for CM 2012 will cover the exact same IP Ranges as the boundaries of CM 2007 (published to AD). Different site codes = unique names in AD (SMS-<site>-boundary). Don't hate on IP Range-based boundary groups; small network; easy config). I know AD site-based boundary groups are preferred, but there's a reason i'm not using it :)

    Question #2: If all future client installs for CM 2007 and 2012 are assigned to their specific site (P07/P12), am I correct to assume that there will not be any possible client overlapping for site assignment?

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-ca/library/jj822985.aspx

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-ca/library/gg682060.aspx

    many more links...

    thanks

    Friday, January 9, 2015 3:55 PM

Answers

    1. Correct;
    2. Correct, also correct that a ConfigMgr 2012 can't assign to a ConfigMgr 2007 site;
    3. Not sure what the exact question is. One thing is for sure a client will not automatically reassign.

    My Blog: http://www.petervanderwoude.nl/
    Follow me on twitter: pvanderwoude

    Friday, January 9, 2015 7:30 PM
  • One thing to clarify here is that there is only a single client assignment ever. Thus, using the word "initial" makes no sense. The client is assigned a site at some point (almost always during initial installation) and that's it, it will never try to assign itself to a different site automatically. Other things may force it to perform a site assignment, but it will never, by itself, for any reason, perform a site assignment or re-assignment.

    Also, using SMSSITECODE=AUTO is generally discouraged. You should always assign the client to the site you know it should be managed by -- that's effectively what you're describing above. SMSSITECODE=AUTO was useful in the pre 2012 days when having more than one primary site was more common, but in general, it has no real place today and in your scenario could cause issues. Thus, you should always specify SMSSITECODE=<sitecode> with the proper site code when installing the client agent.

    For the boundaries and boundary groups, make sure that you don't have overlapping site assignment boundary groups with boundaries defined in 2007. This is unsupported. It shouldn't cause you any issues in the long run if you are always specifying a site code with the SMSMSITECODE property, but it's best avoided in the short term and of course goes away when you get rid of the 2007 site.


    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com | @jasonsandys

    • Marked as answer by fern.santos Saturday, January 10, 2015 1:07 PM
    Friday, January 9, 2015 8:31 PM

All replies

    1. Correct;
    2. Correct, also correct that a ConfigMgr 2012 can't assign to a ConfigMgr 2007 site;
    3. Not sure what the exact question is. One thing is for sure a client will not automatically reassign.

    My Blog: http://www.petervanderwoude.nl/
    Follow me on twitter: pvanderwoude

    Friday, January 9, 2015 7:30 PM
  • One thing to clarify here is that there is only a single client assignment ever. Thus, using the word "initial" makes no sense. The client is assigned a site at some point (almost always during initial installation) and that's it, it will never try to assign itself to a different site automatically. Other things may force it to perform a site assignment, but it will never, by itself, for any reason, perform a site assignment or re-assignment.

    Also, using SMSSITECODE=AUTO is generally discouraged. You should always assign the client to the site you know it should be managed by -- that's effectively what you're describing above. SMSSITECODE=AUTO was useful in the pre 2012 days when having more than one primary site was more common, but in general, it has no real place today and in your scenario could cause issues. Thus, you should always specify SMSSITECODE=<sitecode> with the proper site code when installing the client agent.

    For the boundaries and boundary groups, make sure that you don't have overlapping site assignment boundary groups with boundaries defined in 2007. This is unsupported. It shouldn't cause you any issues in the long run if you are always specifying a site code with the SMSMSITECODE property, but it's best avoided in the short term and of course goes away when you get rid of the 2007 site.


    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com | @jasonsandys

    • Marked as answer by fern.santos Saturday, January 10, 2015 1:07 PM
    Friday, January 9, 2015 8:31 PM