They are called "express installation files." WU, WU for Business, and WSUS support them (because they just tell the WU agent "here's the content, download what you want"), but not ConfigMgr yet (as it downloads the content and then tells the WU agent "the update is in this local folder, install it"). There is a user voice item related to that:
https://configurationmanager.uservoice.com/forums/300492-ideas/suggestions/14255697-using-express-installation-files That limits how much gets downloaded each month (with cumulative updates where many of the components were updated in previous months), and is good overall. Peer-to-peer is also something that's great to implement too, whether you use BranchCache, ConfigMgr peer-to-peer support (Windows PE only today, expanding to full clients in the future), Delivery Optimization (really not applicable to most ConfigMgr scenarios), or third-party alternate content providers that provide many of the same benefits. One item I don't follow below is this one: 1. Machine needs 3 patches as below that are all 50MB currently the client would download 150MB of data. In the new model they will end up downloading the monthly security only updates. If each monthly security only updates is 500MB and it needs 3 patches as below the same client will now download 1.5TB of data. a. 1 patch from October b. 1 patch from November c. 1 patch from December Today, a client would download, say, 3 security updates, totaling about 150MB. With the changes, they will download one single security update, containing 3 fixes, and it will still be 150MB. If you are deploying only security updates, there's zero change in the total size per month; the only change is how many updates make up that size (several or one). If a particular machine is three months out of date (or if you're just looking at it over a three month time period), then the old way would download 12 updates for 450MB; the new way would download 3 updates for 450MB (again, sticking with the example 3 updates per month, 50MB each - obviously it's a little more variable than that). Thanks, -Michael From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 12:08 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] New Servicing Model Win7, etc. - Next Month Although ConfigMgr doesn't have support for it yet, WSUS and the WUA fully support only downloading the delta of the binary update package that is needed. I can't remember what this is called though. So, it's not like they don't have this one covered - or will soon as I know it's on the "list" for the product group. However, this is all the more reason to look at peer to peer content distribution - by my count, only 1610 hits (and it hopefully includes PeerCache), there will be 4 choices for p2p content delivery in ConfigMgr. J From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert Spinelli Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 12:55 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [mssms] New Servicing Model Win7, etc. - Next Month Yeah, not really much we can do about sucking it up. I guess my real concern now is how much the client will need to download now, even if they just need 1 patch. I feel like we're back to SMS 2003 with ITMU, which made you download all patches even if you just needed one. From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roland Janus Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 11:29 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: AW: [mssms] New Servicing Model Win7, etc. - Next Month Was a big subject here already. Pretty sure MS approach will be, no choice to exclude or in other words: suck it up... -R Von: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Robert Spinelli Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. September 2016 15:03 An: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Betreff: [mssms] New Servicing Model Win7, etc. - Next Month I read the article below which gave some good detail in regards to new servicing model that MS is introducing next month. * http://myitforum.com/myitforumwp/2016/08/31/lookout-configmgr-admins-windows-monthly-updates-are-gonna-get-huge/ MS TechNet article * https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/windowsitpro/2016/08/15/further-simplifying-servicing-model-for-windows-7-and-windows-8-1/ Below is my quick summary/understanding of both articles. Was looking for input to make sure I got it right. Basically they are going to stop releasing individual patches and release: 1. Monthly Rollup a. Addresses both security issues and reliability issues in a single update. 2. Monthly Security-only updates a. This update collects all of the security patches for that month into a single update. Unlike the Monthly Rollup, the Security-only update will only include new security patches that are released for that month 3. NET Framework Monthly Rollup a. The monthly .NET Framework Monthly Rollup will deliver both security and reliability updates to all versions of the .NET Framework as a single monthly release 4. Monthly NET Framework security-only update a. NET Framework team will also release a security-only update on Microsoft Update Catalog and Windows Server Update Services every month. Here is some reasons I'm not a fan of this: 1. Historically If there was one bad patch during the month you could exclude rolling that one patch out. In the new model you will have to hold off the whole month of patches for one bad patch. I'm not sure how MS thinks this will make things more secure. 2. Machine needs 3 patches as below that are all 50MB currently the client would download 150MB of data. In the new model they will end up downloading the monthly security only updates. If each monthly security only updates is 500MB and it needs 3 patches as below the same client will now download 1.5TB of data. a. 1 patch from October b. 1 patch from November c. 1 patch from December I'm assuming SCCM will have the option to download the Monthly Security-only updates or the Monthly Rollup (which would be larger) using manual download or ADR ? All input/feedback is welcome. Rob
