locked
Is a CAS really needed because we are multiple continents? RRS feed

  • Question

  • So i ask this question only because i have seen documentation that states " If a location is not on the same continent, it is wise to place a primary site there". Multiple primaries = CAS. Currently my company is on 3 continents (EU,Australia,North America). Clients are only about 5K total, with about an equal split on each continent. Network Connections between the three are T-3 between EU and NA, and Australia is T-1 to NA and EU. I REALLY dont want do a CAS or multiple Primaries, just because of the differences in Continent. I would prefer to do a single primary with a secondary on each Continent, and DP's/branch cache in my smaller locales. Overall there are about 20 Client locations total on all 3 contnients. Is the reason that they recommend the primarys on each continent soley based on connectivity between the continents?

    Ideas?

    Wednesday, May 30, 2012 4:00 PM

Answers

  • From everything I've read and heard the rationale for putting a CAS and multiple primaries was for Administration (as in using the actual Console).  The thought is that it would be rather slow for a person in one continent to have to go back across the wire to use the console if the only Primary was on another continent.

    However, the recommendation that I've read is to basically put up a Terminal Server session (or something you can RDP into) that is located near the primary, and then the administration won't be as slow.

    Now, if all the people doing the SCCM Administration are going to be in the same location as the Primary...then absolutely do not setup a CAS nor even bother with a Terminal Server.  Just setup a Single Primary and create DPs (or Secondaries if you like) at your other locations.


    Mike...

    • Marked as answer by Nedronav Wednesday, May 30, 2012 8:13 PM
    Wednesday, May 30, 2012 4:20 PM

All replies

  • From everything I've read and heard the rationale for putting a CAS and multiple primaries was for Administration (as in using the actual Console).  The thought is that it would be rather slow for a person in one continent to have to go back across the wire to use the console if the only Primary was on another continent.

    However, the recommendation that I've read is to basically put up a Terminal Server session (or something you can RDP into) that is located near the primary, and then the administration won't be as slow.

    Now, if all the people doing the SCCM Administration are going to be in the same location as the Primary...then absolutely do not setup a CAS nor even bother with a Terminal Server.  Just setup a Single Primary and create DPs (or Secondaries if you like) at your other locations.


    Mike...

    • Marked as answer by Nedronav Wednesday, May 30, 2012 8:13 PM
    Wednesday, May 30, 2012 4:20 PM
  • I would install one primary site with multiple secondary sites or just distribution points instead of the secondary sites. When you use multiple primary sites, the replication between those sites are via SQL based replication. When you use one primary site and multiple secondary sites, the replication will go through files based replication based on addresses and senders. Maybe the reason could be for managing devices by local IT administrator on sepperate locations, but still then you can go for the single site installation.

    For capacity planning :


    Central Site
    · Central site - 400000 clients (with MS SQL Enterprise Edition & default configuration)
    · Central site can have max. of 25 child primary
    · Central site with MS SQL std edition will only support 50000 clients.
    · No direct client can be attached to central site

    Primary Site
    · Primary site – can have max of 250 secondary site
    · SQL on same server – Max of 50000 clients
    · SQL on different server – Max of 100000 clients

    Secondary Site
    · Max of 2500 clients per site

    Management Point
    · 10 MP per primary site
    · Per MP in Primary site supports 25000 clients
    · 1 MP per secondary site and should be co hosted on same secondary server
    · Per MP (that’s all) in Secondary site server supports 10000 clients

    Distribution Point
    · Each primary site supports up to 5,000 distribution points as a combined total of distribution points. This total includes all the distribution points at the primary site and all distribution points that belong to the primary sites child secondary sites.
    · Individually, each primary site supports up to 250 distribution points and each distribution point can support up to 4,000 clients.
    · Individually, each secondary site supports up to 250 distribution points and each distribution point can support up to 4,000 clients.


    Dennis de Roo

    Wednesday, May 30, 2012 6:28 PM
  • Is the reason that they recommend the primarys on each continent soley based on connectivity between the continents?

    Who is "they"?

    I concur with both Mike and Dennis. Based on the info provided above, I can't see a specific reason to move away from a single primary.

    I'm not sure where Dennis's scalability numbers came from, but the secondary site one is incorrect. Just for completeness and correctness (even though it doesn;t ncessarily apply to this thread), the official guideline (from http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg682077.aspx#BKMK_SiteAndRoleScale) is

    "Each secondary site can support communications from up to 5,000 clients when you use a secondary site server computer with the recommended hardware and that has a fast and reliable network connection to its primary parent site. A secondary site might be able to support communications from additional clients when its hardware configuration exceeds the recommended hardware configuration."


    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com | Twitter @JasonSandys

    Wednesday, May 30, 2012 7:45 PM
  • "They" is "Mastering System Center 2012 Configuration Manager"...

    Chapter 2 Planning - "One of the Best Practices is not to create a primary site that covers more than one continent."

    and "Are My Locations on the same Continent?" - "If a location is not on the same continent, it is wise to create a primary site for that location"

    I know from experience that every situation is unique, and just wanted to see if there was something i was missing...my situation definately does not need all that extra hierarchy if there is not some extremely compelling reason to do so. This post has shown me that no such reason exists.

    Thanks all for responding!

    Rob

    Wednesday, May 30, 2012 8:21 PM
  •  When you use one primary site and multiple secondary sites, the replication will go through files based replication based on addresses and senders.

    There's also SQL replication involved if I am not mistaken (secondaries sites also have to have SQL (express) and receive a subset of global data).

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

    Thursday, May 31, 2012 7:34 AM
  • I am in a similar situation, is it generally agreed that there is no need for a Primary on each continent, providing suitable Secondary sites and DPs are in place instead?
    Tuesday, August 21, 2012 12:27 PM
  • It depends on the number of clients to be managed. A secondary can handle up to 5k clients. So there's no need for a primary site if there are less than 5k clients per continent (of even 10k if you would set  up two secondaries). That's just a rule of thumb; there are a lot of things to consider though.

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

    Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:17 PM