Yes David that is the correct scenario. And thanks for the sanity check guys. Figured as much, but wasn't sure if there was something I was overlooking mainly around certs.
Sent from my Windows Phone ________________________________ From: CE5AR.ABREG0<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: 8/6/2014 1:10 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [mssms] SCCM client on servers that manage a different infrastructure No conflict at all. Clients can only talk to one site. You need to really manage your boundaries though. Cesar A. Meaning is NOT in words, but inside people! Dr. Myles Munroe My iPad takes half the blame for misspells. > On Aug 5, 2014, at 9:05 PM, David O'Brien <[email protected]> wrote: > > So your servers are hosting roles for Site XYZ and you want to install a > client on them which is assigned to site ABC? > > Never done it myself, but as far as I heard, it works. > > Cheers > David > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Tim Amico > Sent: Wednesday, 6 August 2014 1:55 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [mssms] SCCM client on servers that manage a different infrastructure > > Haven’t had a chance to test this out in a lab yet so curios if anyone has > some insight first. > > I have a client that doesn’t want to use RBA to separate the server and > workstation management in one hierarchy. They want two completely separate > infrastructures for servers and workstations, but they want to be able to > manage the servers that host the workstation infrastructure roles with the > infrastructure for the servers. > > Is there any conflict with installing the SCCM client on servers for one site > that host roles from another site? > > Both sites are SCCM 2012 R2 with HTTPS only, so if anything I would think the > servers that host the management points would have conflicts with the client > authentication certificates. > > > >
