BranchCache = DeDupe on the wire. The BranchCache cache is dedupe, same algo as Server 2012 de-dupe. I.e. dedup transfer.
Last time I checked BranchCache was supported... ;-) Even on Pro with BITS (Thx to MS marketing for clarifying that after 8 years!) Ps. Do the homework and ask questions instead of jumping on the blame game... makes you guys and the list look bad. :) Pss. BranchCache is not our tool as someone said, it's on every piece of Windows. From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Michael Mott Sent: den 3 mars 2016 17:33 To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices So why use something not supported on a desktop OS? <drops mic> From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marcum, John Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 11:27 AM To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices No it's not. ________________________________ John Marcum MCITP, MCTS, MCSA Desktop Architect Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP ________________________________ [MVP] <https://mvp.microsoft.com/en-us/overview> [MMS] <http://mmsmoa.com/> From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Michael Mott Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 10:22 AM To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ms...@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices Is de-dupe OFFICIALLY supported on Enterprise desktop OS's yet? From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 10:04 AM To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ms...@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices <picks up mic> Troy - if you used DeDupe you'd only need to send one email mate :) And yes, when it stops being fun, we'll all go home! Looks like an interesting gig for the (other) Swede! But... 25Gb images X 442 = 11TB over the wire, even if, using Nomad P2P, some of that is LAN not WAN traffic. Oh, if only he had access to DeDupe (Free for the customer) and BranchCache (also Free) he would probably be sending out 5-6GB instead of 25, and be home now having a well-earned Pint :) See you at MMS Mr Martin! From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Troy Martin Sent: 03 March 2016 13:43 To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ms...@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: Re: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices Andreas/Phil, I had much respect for you guys when we worked together at 1E, and I still do today. You're both very intelligent and I applaud you're efforts in the community. None of this is personal, but you're sure making it fun! BranchCache is good tech. However, let's see what the best use when doing "real-world" OSD... <drop the mic> [Image removed by sender. https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1498237153/arwidmark_normal.jpg] Johan Arwidmark (@jarwidmark<https://twitter.com/jarwidmark?refsrc=email&s=11>) 3/2/16, 11:18 PM<https://twitter.com/jarwidmark/status/705245944598532096?refsrc=email&s=11> In the POC lab, pushing 25 GB images to 442 laptops in a distributed environment using SCCM and @1E_Global<https://twitter.com/1E_Global> pic.twitter.com/yxuulxQs2I<https://t.co/yxuulxQs2I> 1E | Software Lifecycle Automation On Mar 3, 2016, at 6:46 AM, Andreas Hammarskjöld <jun...@2pintsoftware.com<mailto:jun...@2pintsoftware.com>> wrote: I would say - if you want to educate you have to tell the whole story. Why on earth would you push 25GB of .iso to a branch (head office shouldn't be included I think)? First off, skip the x86 builds, nobody does x86 these days? Or am I wrong? Then, no need to download the wim's and ISO's? Or do you expect people to burn their own DVD images in the branches? So my list of media would look like the following, education and enterprise x64 (Included x86 for reference here): (Skipping LTSB to keep Johan A happy ;-). So let's have a look what de-duplication would do to that: File DedupSize (deduped content) Size of file Saving (What to transfer) Percentage h:\en_windows_10_education_version_1511_x64\install.wim 3088088801 3330923026 242834225 92,71% h:\en_windows_10_education_version_1511_x86\install.wim 2286524835 2440168556 153643721 93,70% h:\en_windows_10_enterprise_version_1511_x64\install.wim 3088534192 3330734792 242200600 92,73% h:\en_windows_10_enterprise_version_1511_x86\install.wim 2287174295 2440826179 153651884 93,70% Note that those stats are from de-duped storage savings. So if you were to transfer these files using BranchCache that would roughly reduce the size by about 46%. (You still have to get the first data down there). So instead of 6.6 GB for the x64 it would transfer 3+ and for the x86 4.4GB it would transfer 2.2. Most people wouldn't do enterprise and education though, so typically you would only have your x64 master .wim to deploy and not 25GB of unneeded crap. //Andreas From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Phil Wilcock Sent: den 3 mars 2016 08:55 To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ms...@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices Jason, I did test BranchCache in Hosted Cache mode (ages ago, and only superficially) - and it worked with SCCM, so as Andreas said, it's probably more of a common sense/design constraint that led to MS not supporting that config. Incidentally, I went to a session at NICCONF by Riverbed - their new SD-WAN stuff looks interesting, and I see that they bought another SD-WAN provider - https://www.ocedo.com/en/ recently As to the RiverBed publishing an SCP - don't know but I have some PowerShell that can do that for you if you need it...somewhere.. 25Gb Troy? Phew that's a lot of content.. Still, with a lot of common blocks in there, DeDuplication should reduce that by about 75-90% - all the way to the client. ..But only if you use BranchCache Cheers Phil From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Troy Martin Sent: 02 March 2016 23:00 To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ms...@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices Hey Jason, One consideration for managing the realities of WAN optimization devices (i.e. Riverbed) in place of DPs, is during OS migrations and trying to keep the large OSD content "fresh" on the devices. WAN/Riverbed devices often come with "not enough" disk space when it comes to hosting OSD content and other business content simultaneously i.e. Sharepoint, file-sharing, etc. Upgrading to larger disks on the devices can be very costly. In 2011, we wrote a blog about it<http://www.1e.com/blogs/2011/11/22/nomad-enterprise-eliminates-the-need-for-costly-wan-optimization-device-upgrades/>. Back then, OSD content was indeed large. But back then, one may have been only managing a few images (.wim)...and that's it. With Windows 10 as you know, all of that has changed and many are likely to be managing not only a few images (and then a .wim for each supported architecture type) but also the OS Upgrade Package (.iso) content for each Windows 10 edition supported (and then a .iso for each supported OS architecture type). ? OS Image Packages (.wim) for Wipe-n-Load and Refresh scenarios ? OS Upgrade Packages (.iso) for In-Place Upgrade scenarios Take a look at the slide below from a webinar we did last year<http://www.1e.com/turbocharge-your-windows-10-migration-with-nomad-6-0/>, as it explains what the potential is in supporting the minimum total content size required to support Windows 10 OSD (i.e. minimum total content size, based on the supported OS editions and architecture types): <image002.jpg> Not many have the luxury of being guaranteed ~25GB of diskspace for OSD on each WAN/WAAS/Riverbed device in the environment. What would it cost a business to upgrade all of the devices so that ~25GB could be guaranteed...just for OSD? You can see that solely relying on WAAS/Riverbed devices for Windows 10 OSD purposes alone will be a very costly proposition to the business. Not trying to sell anything in this reply, but merely attempting to help the community where we can because "we've been there, done that" and want to bring value by helping to avoid some of the pitfalls. Hopefully, this helps to build your case for the design being proposed. Yes, our goal as a software company is to sell software. But we also want to help educate the community and industry that we are all so passionate about, whenever we can. This is what 1E is all about :) Troy L. Martin | Technical Architect 1E | Software Lifecycle Automation for the Digital Business US Mobile: +1 (678) 898-6147 | UK Phone : +44 208 326 9141 troy.mar...@1e.com<mailto:troy.mar...@1e.com> | www.1e.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.1e.com_&d=BQMFAg&c=Ln8c1CLEgbhz4W2FGOnrXYpHvIYN4k_cXHVmsANM4XI&r=zAhc69MwvUId2afOheLZsnttbIFqxDANe5KRT-ZKir4&m=uHdy6p01-w9GZjdBVTraJ5PHeWP6yKoA_xCBrm33uC4&s=lfm9K0cSqM44FHIoBa6p0wzT4MWYkn_0HYGNmWgkATs&e=> Facebook<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_1eglobal&d=BQMFAg&c=Ln8c1CLEgbhz4W2FGOnrXYpHvIYN4k_cXHVmsANM4XI&r=zAhc69MwvUId2afOheLZsnttbIFqxDANe5KRT-ZKir4&m=uHdy6p01-w9GZjdBVTraJ5PHeWP6yKoA_xCBrm33uC4&s=RRWJDZaMGcmivktB58TkvRLoQr1bC6jIDj-MN1oDLlE&e=> | Twitter<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_1e-5Fglobal_&d=BQMFAg&c=Ln8c1CLEgbhz4W2FGOnrXYpHvIYN4k_cXHVmsANM4XI&r=zAhc69MwvUId2afOheLZsnttbIFqxDANe5KRT-ZKir4&m=uHdy6p01-w9GZjdBVTraJ5PHeWP6yKoA_xCBrm33uC4&s=6SY99zYqJ1R5pAavjFi-JmFdxUD0lt-n0XwOK-omJcI&e=> | YouTube<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.youtube.com_1enews&d=BQMFAg&c=Ln8c1CLEgbhz4W2FGOnrXYpHvIYN4k_cXHVmsANM4XI&r=zAhc69MwvUId2afOheLZsnttbIFqxDANe5KRT-ZKir4&m=uHdy6p01-w9GZjdBVTraJ5PHeWP6yKoA_xCBrm33uC4&s=XWjlpxF0vI8J3n42uqWMrEXgHphlWI2PD9XZHOHhX8U&e=> | Blogs<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__blogs.1e.com_&d=BQMFAg&c=Ln8c1CLEgbhz4W2FGOnrXYpHvIYN4k_cXHVmsANM4XI&r=zAhc69MwvUId2afOheLZsnttbIFqxDANe5KRT-ZKir4&m=uHdy6p01-w9GZjdBVTraJ5PHeWP6yKoA_xCBrm33uC4&s=tKrxeysyE64idSmjz1G3NP2ojp9RhRdpv1OljUgTbyg&e=> | RSS<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__blogs.1e.com_index.php_feed_&d=BQMFAg&c=Ln8c1CLEgbhz4W2FGOnrXYpHvIYN4k_cXHVmsANM4XI&r=zAhc69MwvUId2afOheLZsnttbIFqxDANe5KRT-ZKir4&m=uHdy6p01-w9GZjdBVTraJ5PHeWP6yKoA_xCBrm33uC4&s=qGt8-ZGt5rG-J3ClWoppG9TfmFKmktUZprrf0vtNjII&e=> From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Wallace Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 4:58 PM To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ms...@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: Re: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices I guess then Ed it depends upon your definition of "simple" is. If "simple" is having to deploy an additional agent to my entire client estate instead of enabling a feature which is already built into the core OS then I guess you've got me there. If simple is having to update my product using a channel which is not the base update channel in CM then yup, again you have me. I grant you that BranchCache is nowhere near the sophistication that some peer caching technologies have. I'm not trying to convince anyone to buy anything Ed. My brief is to deploy using out of the box technology where possible and that is what I am doing. I have a fallback position that I am comfortable with. On 2 Mar 2016, at 21:16, Ed Aldrich <ed.aldr...@1e.com<mailto:ed.aldr...@1e.com>> wrote: "...I am planning on using simple, cheaper and well proven technology" Can't argue cheaper... but simple and well proven, I'd just say that 30million Nomad licenses over 1700 customers argues nicely for "well proven". ...and I'm out. Ed Aldrich |Technical Enablement Lead 1E | Software Lifecycle Automation for the Digital Business Mobile: (401) 924-2293 ed.aldr...@1e.com<mailto:ed.aldr...@1e.com> | www.1e.com<http://www.1e.com/> <image003.png> Ent Client Mgmt MVP (2003-2016) From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Wallace Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 3:26 PM To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ms...@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices Thanks John This customer is deploying Riverbeds as we speak. No, not in the slightest - I am not trying to run a DP on the appliance - just want to be familiar with what it can offer when it sits between the small number of DPs that we will be hosting in Azure and the clients which will largely be running BranchCache. Were I to have a branch office scenario where I needed a DP and I couldn't have a DP then I would aim to use a peer caching technology (which we are doing for free) or buy one (in this case, it likely would be a different product to Nomad) so I am planning on using simple, cheaper and well proven technology :) Jason From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marcum, John Sent: 02 March 2016 19:57 To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ms...@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices Jeeze... that post was 5 years ago! Nobody uses Riverbeds anymore. When I did say that I liked Riverbeds it was only as a WAN accelerator not anything more. It sounds like you are trying to run a DP on the appliance. If that's the case I'm unfamiliar with that use case, probably because as I said...Nobody uses riverbeds anymore. :) If I had a branch office scenario where I needed a DP and I couldn't have a DP I'd buy nomad and be done with it. That is simple, cheap and well proven technology. ________________________________ John Marcum MCITP, MCTS, MCSA Desktop Architect Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP ________________________________ <image004.png><https://mvp.microsoft.com/en-us/overview> <image005.png><http://mmsmoa.com/> From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com> [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Wallace Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 10:29 AM To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ms...@lists.myitforum.com> Subject: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices Hi there folks I was wondering if someone would have some detail on using Riverbed Steelheads with CM Agents please? We are working on a CM design with DPs at a head office location hosting BranchCache and clients at remote offices. Between them we have a number of SteelHeads and I am keen to find out more about how this scenario stands up. The customer only supports Riverbedding HTTPS traffic so the assumption is that we will be supplying the web server certs of the DPs so that they can get at the data while in transit in order to cache it As I have been BinGoogling I have found that Mr Marcum is a fan but Mr Sandys is not https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/systemcenter/en-US/d9ced859-9fe9-4210-9418-3b3f5e02be45/riverbed-scenario?forum=configmgrgeneral I also note that RiOS 8.5 introduced support for BranchCache in hosted mode. Now I know that CM does not support Hosted mode, running in distributed mode but should the customer implement this does anyone know if the Riverbeds then publish a service connection point? Best Wishes Jason ________________________________ Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be protected by the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and then delete it from your computer. ________________________________ Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this email or calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is strictly prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this email will operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract. ________________________________ Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this email or calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is strictly prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this email will operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract. ________________________________ Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this email or calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is strictly prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this email will operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract. ________________________________ Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this email or calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is strictly prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this email will operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract. ________________________________ Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this email or calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is strictly prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this email will operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract.
