locked
SCCM 2012 Hierarchy design RRS feed

 > 

  • Question

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Hi

    I am designing an SCCM 2012 environment at the moment.

    We have 7 locations.  2 are data centers and have excellent links between them.  our main office is well connected to the DCs 100MB link.

    All other offices have between 50 and 200 users.  All of these offices have at least 10MB links to the main office and the 2 x DCs.

    I was thinking of deploying CAS and Primary Site servers in 1 DC.  Installing SQL 2008 R2 there also to support this.  Then in secondary DC installing Secondary Site Server.

    For all offices with users I am planning to implement distribution points.  

    My main concern is that we have an 8th location that is a partner company that has a separate forest with no trust.  How can I configure that so that we can control what can be deployed but that the local staff can administer the deployments etc??

    Also how will SQL work for me in this regard in the szecondary location - I know SQL Express will be used, but will Express support a large SCCM database?

    Thanks in advance!

    Friday, August 10, 2012 1:47 PM

Answers

All replies

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    1
    Sign in to vote
    No need for a CAS at all. Just go for a standalone primary and sender-enabled DPs.
    See http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg712701.aspx#Plan_Com_X_Forest for managing clients in different forests.

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

    Friday, August 10, 2012 2:09 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    2
    Sign in to vote

    You should be fine by implementing a single primary forest. I do not see any reasons for installing secondary sites. If you choose to, then SQL express will be installed automatically when you install the secondary site server.

    You will be able to implement a DP in the non-trusted forest, but not a SUP. Yuo either have to open the firewall and allow the clients to use the SUP in the DC or configure an Internet based SUP.

    Kent Agerlund | My blogs: blog.coretech.dk/kea and SCUG.dk/ | Twitter: @Agerlund | Linkedin: Kent Agerlund

    Friday, August 10, 2012 2:15 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Many thanks to you both for your responses.  So basically I should install a primary site in our main location and then DPs and SUPs in all other locations (aprt from the remote untrusted forest)??

    Also what do I need to consider for DR if the main site that holds the primary site server is lost?

    If I do go with secondary sites, how large does the SCCM DB grow to, with 5-6K clients connected?  Im just thinking will SQL Express be able to support this?

    Thanks!

    Monday, August 20, 2012 8:00 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    1
    Sign in to vote
    So basically I should install a primary site in our main location and then DPs and SUPs in all other locations (aprt from the remote untrusted forest)??
    Correct.
    Also what do I need to consider for DR if the main site that holds the primary site server is lost?
    DR in ConfigMgr (like most other products) is backup and restore. Are you actually asking about HA and/or site resiliency?
    If I do go with secondary sites, how large does the SCCM DB grow to, with 5-6K clients connected?  Im just thinking will SQL Express be able to support this?
    Secondary sites do not store client information so the DB doesn't grow very large at all.

    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com

    Monday, August 20, 2012 6:04 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    thanks for your response Jason!

    I did alot of reading on this yesterday and yes it looks like backup/restore is my only option.  As far as HA goes though what is the best method.  I have attached a diagram of my planned design - do you see any issues with this?  In the untrsuted domain locations there will be no OS deployement via SCCM - they will also use their existing WSUS architecture for updates.  All servers wll be virtual and will run on highly available clustered virtual environments

    Thanks again all!


    • Edited by Sjmry1 Tuesday, August 21, 2012 8:31 AM
    Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:44 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    1
    Sign in to vote

    A handful of comments

    - No reason to separate SQL from the primary site server -- I would highly recommend that you don't as separating the two will definitely complicate any failovers you may have and will complicate your installation and maintenance in general.

    - Never use a DC as a site system -- it'll cause you endless headaches and is a terrible security practice

    - For the office with only 12 clients you can use BranchCache (if all of the client are Win 7 Ent) instead of adding a DP

    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com

    Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:54 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Hi Jason

    DC in aboce diagram stands for data center, not domain controller

    I wnat to separate SQL as I am build SCOM as well and want to house both SCCM and SCOM dbs on a shared SQL system

    The office with 12 PCs are all running XP unfortunately so I cannot use branch cache!

    Thanks!

    Wednesday, August 22, 2012 6:49 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    1
    Sign in to vote

    I wnat to separate SQL as I am build SCOM as well and want to house both SCCM and SCOM dbs on a shared SQL system

    Plan and test carefully. Both products heavily rely on SQL server and can put a huge load on it. Also make sure you use two separate SSRS instances because OpsMgr takes over SSRS security making it unusable for any other application.

    Jason | http://blog.configmgrftw.com

    Wednesday, August 22, 2012 1:53 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    super, thanks for your help Jason!
    Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:03 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Hi all, again!

    I just need clarification on one thing:

    Do I need secondary site servers for my deployment?  What will they give me should the primary site server at the primary data center become unavailable?

    Thanks

    Monday, September 3, 2012 12:59 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    Secondaries are only needed if you are concerned about the upward traffic (clients to primary). Secondaries do not provide fault tolerance.

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

    Monday, September 3, 2012 1:25 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    thanks Torsten!  I dont think I need them in my case then!
    Monday, September 3, 2012 1:36 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Did you update your SCCM diagram and care to share your final design?  Send to: jeff.jung@allianzlife.com

    Thanks!

    Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:48 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Hi ,

    I like this post very much and it is almost similar on which I am working on at the moment.

    Is it possible for you to share SCCM Ifra diagram with me so that It will really help me.

    Thanks

    Wednesday, August 13, 2014 2:54 AM