it pains me to say, but it's this: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2860244/en-au I totally forgot about that issue when we implemented the DPs over 8 months ago. Now the customer started testing them and found the problem.
------- David http://www.david-obrien.net From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] Clients ignoring boundaries Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 13:28:45 +0000 Multiple nics (wired/wireless)…connected to two different subnets? If so, make sure the nic connected to the desired boundary the preferred DP(s) connected to, is the only nic that is ENABLED. Is the site/location/subnet behind a Nat’ed firewall, masking/spoofing all the client’s IP? Is the Proxy Settings configured in the ConfigMgr control panel applet? Troy L. Martin | Principal Consultant 1E | Empowering Efficient IT US Mobile: +1 (678) 898-6147 UK Mobile : +44 782 655 0296 [email protected] | www.1e.com Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | Blogs | RSS Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David O'Brien Sent: Friday, February 7, 2014 7:45 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [mssms] Clients ignoring boundaries Hi all, clients in a site are all ignoring the configured boundaries. 1 central DP in biggest location lots of remote DPs All boundaries are IP ranges, all boundaries are members of respective Boundary Groups and remote DP is assigned to Boundary Group as FAST Site System for Content Location. All DPs have fallback disabled! Client in remote location now asks MP for content location and MP_Location.log shows me this: adding client's assigned site as FALLBACK This means that the MP thinks the client is outside of any boundary, still the MP tells the client to go to the central DP and get the content. First: I already tried IP range for that one client, IP Subnet and even AD Site, that client is always put into "FALLBACK". Second: If that would be the case, why is it redirected to the central DP? The MP seems to work fine. I can create new collections, put machines into those, create new Deployments and those machines will get the deployment. So I believe I can rule out a misbehaving MP, at least for that part. Version is 2012 SP1 CU3. Any idea? ------- David http://www.david-obrien.net 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.
