Short term I had to go to my boundary group for my secondary site and I added 
all those subnets.

This will likely mean all my regional boxes will end up also using it as a DP 
unfortunately Unless the clients somehow know to use the other boundary group 
DP they are assigned to because of the relationship pointing up to the 
secondary site server MP DP.



From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Burke, John
Sent: May-02-17 10:25 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] Proxy Management Point and Boundary behavior post 1610

Hi,

We upgraded from 1606 to 1610 to 1702 and trying to get a handle on the 
boundary changes.
I’ve been told by our network folks that the clients are all going up to our 
primary MP UNLESS we add the proxy management point – secondary site – within 
the boundary group.


We wanted to have systems in an area use DP’s in their local area first, and 
fall back to secondary site server DP for software AND go the secondary site 
server MP for policy vs going all the way to primary server.  That doesn’t seem 
to be happening though.  In order for us to have clients get policy and



We currently have an Assignment Boundary group for our Secondary site that has 
all the boundaries within it but NO site System count on it.  That has no 
relationships.

We have the secondary site boundary group  that has no subnets or boundaries 
assigned, and no relationships.  Our MP has the DP role too.

Then we have our regional local DPs  with boundaries assigned and the local dps 
plus relationships to the above secondary site boundary group.


I was hoping this setup would allow all our clients in those local boundary 
group to use the local DP for all the software and go to the secondary site 
server MP for policy and only use the DP on that MP for fallback.


I figured maybe if we enabled preferrned management points but then we can’t 
specify oNLY use it for MP and not DP? DO we need to uninstall the DP role from 
our MP (not even sure you can do that)?


Reply via email to