Thanks, that is what I was trying to communicate. Even with multiple primaries you still have 1 site. Just more primaries.
So 2 primaries trying to manage machines at a sinlge location as if they were in 2 seperate sites is ... YOu would need 2 seperate domains and 2 seperate primaries and eliminate the CAS. I normally do not recomend consultants, but in this case I think you should hire one for a few weeks to find out what you are trying to accomplish, and then help you design a system to accomplish those goals. I do not think there is enough experience at that company to successfully implement configmgr. Do not mean to be harsh, trying to give sound advice and save you a lot of headaches in the long run. On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Bruce Hethcote <[email protected]>wrote: > To add to Todd’s comment, a site is no longer a security boundary in a > multi-level CM12 hierarchy and things like collections become “global data”. > > > > Here’s some good info (including what is and what is not) on global data: > > > http://blogs.technet.com/b/server-cloud/archive/2012/03/06/data-replication-in-system-center-2012-configuration-manager.aspx > > > > CM12 does support overlapping boundaries for content > location<http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg712679.aspx#BKMK_BoundaryOverlap>, > but I think when it comes to overlap and site assignment, you’d end up with > some undesired results > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Todd Hemsell > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 22, 2013 4:08 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [mssms] RE: Overlapping Boundries > > > > everything you make on one site goes over to the other site and vice > versa. > > They are all going to be members of the same "Site" no matter what once > they are joined to a CAS. All the same site code. > > > > At least that is my understanding. > > > > What you are doing is not going to accomplish any discernible goal unless > you have 500 thousand machines or something. > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Pappin, Nick <[email protected]> wrote: > > There is a size component to the decision to have multiple primaries. I > believe that we could potentially use a RBA system however it was decided > not to go that way for the sake of scaling the system in place. However I > am still having trouble finding a good resource for having two Primary > Sites Boundaries that could potentially overlap either accidentally or by > design. Has anyone tried this? > > > > Nick > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Dzikowski, Michael > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 21, 2013 12:03 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [mssms] RE: Overlapping Boundries > > > > Why two primaries? Did you have a technical reason to place two sites > (size, geo-location, etc.)? Could you get by with RBA? > > > > Mike D- > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *Pappin, Nick > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 21, 2013 2:53 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [mssms] Overlapping Boundries > > > > Hi All, > > I have a beginners question. We have two SCCM primary sites that are > both connected to a CAS server. Both primary sites are for different > business units and but all of the IP addresses of the machines that they > are to manage are intermingled quite badly. As such I cannot use sites or > subnets to create a boundary. And most of the time to use a range it will > have to be a range of one IP. So my question is can we overlap the > boundaries for the two primary sites. Then use group policy to push the > SCCM client onto the machines, having the group policies, which will be > linked to two different non-overlapping OU’s, decide which primary site the > computer will be a member of? We would not be doing any automated client > deployment from the SCCM servers themselves. Can this be done or is there > something that I am missing? > > > > Nick Pappin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > DISCLAIMER: This is a PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL message for the ordinary > user of this email address. If you are not the intended recipient, please > delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in > delivery. NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to > bind 1E to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written > agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail > for such purpose. > >
