We’ve always used IP ranges, maybe this was why. I don’t recall.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Juelich Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 1:21 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [mssms] Site Assignment Issues I thought 'IP Range' was the recommended implementation because Subnet and Site Only posed issues. Maybe I'm remembering wrong... On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Chris Barnes <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Hey guys – Have an interesting one for you. I am doing an SCCM Migration at a client. They have 4 existing SCCM sites (1 2007 Central, 2 2007 Child Primary’s, 1 2012 Primary), plus the new 1602 site I just built. I am seeing some issues with site assignment as it relates to client push. I am needing to use an IP Address Range to get the client to be assigned, using a subnet as a boundary isn’t working. There was some existing boundary overlap, I believe I have cleaned all of that up. All sites are publishing correctly. I have made sure that before I add a boundary to the new site, I have removed it from any of the existing sites. Is there anything else that I am missing? Chris Barnes Coretek Services | Enterprise Consultant ( 248.767.4415 <tel:248.767.4415> cell * [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> : http://www.coretekservices.com <http://www.coretekservices.com/>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
