We have most if not all our machines with vPRO already. We don't have any of the PC's with WOL enabled. We have around 350 machines in a campus type setup. They are all on a single subnet. Not sure about any kind of networking issues we may run into. I don't think we do have anything that would stop WOL.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of steven hosking Sent: Friday, September 5, 2014 2:10 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Who uses AMT and Out of Band? Just to add a voice in there, the biggest issue we had when putting in the AMT OOB solution was to ensure that all of the devices actually have the AMT chips turned on an enabled, we found that half our fleet which we had inherited via acquisition were typically purchased for the lowest cost at that point in time, so some had the AMT vPRO components onboard, and some did not, what made it a nightmare was there was no standard along the lines of hardware models, and the Vendor couldn't provide us any information about how many of the devices had the vPRO components without looking inside every one of the cases. other then that the tech is pretty robust, but it just wasn't suitable in our environment. another option if you are wanting to turn on machines remotely is third party tools like the 1E nightwatchman. ________________________________ From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Who uses AMT and Out of Band? Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 01:16:02 +0000 I'll disagree with you on both parts. As already mentioned, subnet directed broadcasts can and do work well (I've seen some larger orgs implement it quite successfully) as does proxy wake-up. The reason it sent your network off into lala land was because when you turned it on, the network team wasn't involved. The behavior is well documented on TechNet and not involving them when it was turned on was the real source of the problem. There's nothing "funky" about MAC address spoofing and is a well-known practice. Don't blame a lack of research on the product. Does that mean there's not alternate ways of accomplishing the task or room for improvement? Certainly not. But that doesn't mean what's out of the box can't work well with planning and understanding of how it works. J From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Lang Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 5:31 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Who uses AMT and Out of Band? Purely Magic Packets (WOL) is largely useless on a subnetted network, which most places large enough to use SCCM are by design. Now, if you're talking about that wonky SCCM "Directed Wake Up Proxy Packet" thing SCCM Has, I'd strongly recommend against turning that on. Ever. Does some funky MAC Address spoofing that sent our switches into "drop the switchport" mode every 5 minutes or so on every single port, generally wreaked havoc until we disabled it again. More info/forum posts here: https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11835361/mac-address-flapping-and-sccm-wake-proxy#3953829 Jason Lang From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Heaton, Joseph@Wildlife Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 5:58 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: [mssms] RE: Who uses AMT and Out of Band? What about using magic packets only? From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Marcum, John Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 1:48 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: [mssms] RE: Who uses AMT and Out of Band? With SCCM? It doesn't even work. I mean, it does but only with really old versions of the agent. CSS told me to turn it off and get the Intel tool. From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kent, Mark Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 1:38 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Who uses AMT and Out of Band? We're still debating it as well. Don't know if it's worth the hassle to setup and maintain. Lots of confusing docs, various versions of the agent (we have 3.x up through 9), etc. Mark Kent (MCP) Sr. Desktop Systems Engineer Computing & Technology Services - SUNY Buffalo State From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Aubrey Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 2:25 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: [mssms] Who uses AMT and Out of Band? We are looking into enabling Out of Band with AMT support in our environment. Does anyone use it? Is it helpful? For the most part we'll be using it to remotely wake up machines and troubleshooting. It looks like a big set up, but should make things easier for software deployments and the help desk. Most of our PC's do have AMT enabled, so that isn't going to be an issue. --John ________________________________ 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. ________________________________ 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.
