[mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited

Finally have some real feedback about BranchCache and BITS. Got our site built and began unit testing, What we found so far; 1. Seems like all Package and Program downloads are BITS background transfers, so they follow rate limits, however, User initiated Application downloads STILL happen in

Re: [mssms] ConfigMgr 1606 current branch available now

Where is the client data sources dashboard we were promised in 1605? Am I not wAiting long enough for something, or did it not make it to RTM. On Jul 22, 2016 11:46 AM, "Brian Illner" wrote: > > > *david james (@djammmer

RE: [mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited

um.com [mailto: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jay Marsett *Sent:* 21 July 2016 18:57 *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com *Subject:* [mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited Finally have some real feedback about BranchCache and BITS. Got our site built and began unit testing, What

RE: [mssms] Bits and BranchCache revisited

ens with a different PC. > > > > Thanks, > > -Michael > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto: > listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jay Marsett > *Sent:* Thursday, July 21, 2016 10:57 AM > *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com > *Subject:* [

Re: [mssms] BranchCache, ConfigMgr, and PRO Sku

So much great feedback! We were contemplating utilizing a pretty slow footprint for BITS policy, 1-2MB let's say, across the board, and then narrow that bandwidth further using networking equipment, where appropriate. Anyone else doing something similar? Thanks On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:29

[mssms] New Software Center old client

Hope everyone is well. Just wanted to see if we had heard or seen any issues with enabling the “New software center” client feature, before the client is upgraded to 1511 or newer? EG., recently upgraded a 2012 R2 site, will enabling this new client feature cause any issues for clients that

Re: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround using Branchcache?

Phil, Are you saying the "publish-bcwebcontent" command line would be run against the content library itself through the web interface of the DP? Wouldn't it have to be the DP that these clients would be checking the BC hash against? And wouldn't a successful deployment using the branchcache

RE: [mssms] Content for Apps broken in Prestage media, workaround using Branchcache?

Thank you. Interesting thought on doing the whole content lib. On Aug 9, 2016 16:53, "Phil Wilcock" <ph...@2pintsoftware.com> wrote: > > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists. > myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jay Marsett > *Sent

[mssms] Re: Win 10 1607 issues installing updates from WSUS

updates apply from WSUS, then I think we are good to go. On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Jay Marsett <jmars...@gmail.com> wrote: > Seeing issues downloading/installing updates on 1607 builds pulling > updates from WSUS using the ztiwindowsupdate.wsf process with MDT (2013 > upda

[mssms] Win 10 1607 issues installing updates from WSUS

Seeing issues downloading/installing updates on 1607 builds pulling updates from WSUS using the ztiwindowsupdate.wsf process with MDT (2013 update 1 build 8298) integrated task sequences in SCCM CB (1606). Looks and acts the same as this.

Re: [mssms] KB3194588

In hindsight, no idea if the KB instructions you linked are even applicable to a SUS DB hosted via WID, so use at your own risk. Remember to backup first. Jay On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Jay Marsett <jmars...@gmail.com> wrote: > James, > > You can connect to the WID using

Re: [mssms] KB3194588

James, You can connect to the WID using SQL management studio, but your connection strings are not intuitive. Here is a blog post for a different MS tool that uses a WID, process is the same for the WSUS DB.

[mssms] Windows 10 Build 1607 issues with MBAM

Hi guys have 2 main issues and I am struggling to understand if it is environmental, or just "mental"? We are SCCM CB 1606, and ADK build 1607 with updated boot images. I have Windows 10 1607, with the 10/11/2016 CU pre-installed, in a standard (non-MDT) client task sequence. We have the MB 2.5

Re: [mssms] FW: Windows 10 Creators Update advances security and best-in-class modern IT tools

I am a little unsure about the "In-Place" UEFI conversion. Aside from the fact that it requires an IT manager (j/k), how will it really work across so many different manufacturers, models and flash revisions (not to mention flash providers). Technically this is already possible using the vendor

Re: [mssms] FW: Windows 10 Creators Update advances security and best-in-class modern IT tools

n-us/sccm/osd/deploy-use/task- > sequence-steps-to-manage-bios-to-uefi-conversion > > > > MS gives NO guidance on how do the manufacturer specific steps. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:list

Re: [mssms] RE: Definition Updates and Synchronization Schedule

Chris, Sorry it took me a bit to respond here, but I wanted to add something to the discussion by saying that I've seen some clients utilize the "UNC" path as the primary update method (in EP/Client policy), leaving the SUP as a secondary, or tertiary update source for client definitions. Might

[mssms] Management Point error 500

ng away WMI" on this host, as it is the Primary site server, but I am open to anyone's suggestions, or experiences. I did open a premiere support ticket, but that process is slower than molasses in January these days. Thanks in advance Jay Marsett

Re: [mssms] Management Point error 500

the troubleshooting effort with IIS and the VM can effectively be a throw away. Oh well, live and learn. Thanks again. Jay Marsett On Jul 15, 2017 3:35 PM, "Jason Sandys" <ja...@sandys.us> wrote: > The use the same service and WMI namespace because that’s how they were > designed. It’s qui

[mssms] Creators update with CM 1702 and the 1610 client.

Guys, Client I have been working with has been using the CCMcache for their own custom tools for years. It seems that the 1702 client now has added behavior that deletes files and folders from the CCMcache that are not put there by ConfigMgr, at every reboot. They are willing to rewrite a lot

Re: [mssms] RE: Queries Disappeared from User Collections

They made it through! On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Gushue, William wrote: > I don’t know if these messages are getting through because I never see > them, but anyway not sure what happened but re-running the Discoveries has > solved the issue. Thanks. > > > > *From:*

[mssms] Windows 10 In-Place upgrade with custom winre environment

Guys and Gals, Running into an issue with the in-place upgrade of windows 10. My client utilizes a custom WinRE image in their Windows 10 bare metal deployments. Whenever they in-place upgrade windows 10, they lose their custom recovery environment. I get why this is happening, because Windows

[mssms] SUP WSUS BranchCache and Delivery Optimization

Can anyone correct me if I am wrong? These 2 articles are leading me to believe that you need to disable Delivery Optimization on Win10 in order for the content transfer to fall back to BranchCache when using Configuration Manager BranchCache enabled DPs and Content created from a software

RE: [mssms] SUP WSUS BranchCache and Delivery Optimization

luding updates. > > > > J > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists. > myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jay Marsett > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 17, 2018 4:34 PM > *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com > *Subject:* [mssms] SUP WSUS BranchCache and Deli