Design Issue: Secondary Sites or DP servers only

myITforum.com Community Forum

Home Forums Blogs Live Support chat Search Articles Wiki FAQ Email Lists Register Login My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums

Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ Ticket List Log Out

All Forums RSS Feed Subscription:

Design Issue: Secondary Sites or DP servers only

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Management Products] >> Microsoft Systems Management Server >> SMS 2003 >> Design Issue: Secondary Sites or DP servers only

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Design Issue: Secondary Sites or DP servers only - 5/7/2008 10:25:00 AM

sscc

Posts: 25
Score: 0
Joined: 3/26/2008
Status: offline

We have three main network sites (say A, B , C). The network site A supports about 3000 PCs, the site B have 1500 PCs, and the site C have 800 PCs.

The site A is the central primary SMS site with 1 SQL/Site server, 2 MP NLB servers, 2 DP servers. The site B has 1 server for secondary site server/DP server plus 2 DP servers. The site C has one server for secondary site server/DP server.

The network links are 34MB from each site to a private metroVPN network. The network link to the site A has been used heavily but the other two links are not busy at all.

Do I need secondary sites on the site B and C or not? It seems to me that secondary sites require much more operation management but it may have limited benefits.

Can I just use protected DP servers for the site A such that it will serve only 3000 PCs in the site? Basically, I want that all PCs not in the Site A will be managed by either site B or site C.

Thanks in advance!

Post #: 1

RE: Design Issue: Secondary Sites or DP servers only - 5/7/2008 10:46:03 AM

bmason505

Posts: 2009
Score: 110
Joined: 1/23/2003
From: Minneapolis, MN
Status: offline

If you're not using the secondary to throttle, then by all means go to protected DP's - like you say, much less overhead and easier to manage. Yes to the last question.

_____________________________

Brian Mason
MCSA\MCSE\MS MVP - SCCM
Wells Fargo
http://www.miscusergroup.org/

(in reply to sscc)

Post #: 2

RE: Design Issue: Secondary Sites or DP servers only - 5/7/2008 10:46:04 AM

phaustein

Posts: 859
Score: 32
Joined: 3/21/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

So you are saying that there is little traffic between Site A and the other sites, right? And all your traffic is localized on Site A's network?

_____________________________

Hope this helps.
Paul

(in reply to sscc)

Post #: 3

Yes. But remember that Site A is the primary site. - 5/7/2008 11:08:51 AM

sscc

Posts: 25
Score: 0
Joined: 3/26/2008
Status: offline

Yes, I want little traffic between Site A and other sites as you said to try to localized the traiffic on Site A. But remember that Site A is the primary site. And we have Advanced clients only SMS 2003 implementation.

Thank you very much.

(in reply to phaustein)

Post #: 4

RE: Yes. But remember that Site A is the primary site. - 5/7/2008 5:32:45 PM

phaustein

Posts: 859
Score: 32
Joined: 3/21/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

The secondaries, if using bandwidth throttling will help to reduce the traffic between the site. If you just have DPs at those location your network traffic will increase, when policy requests and inventories are performed. With that many clients at the other sites, I would suggest leaving the sec sites there. But if you monitor your network performance with the current configuration and then again with the removal of the sec site and just make it a DP, that should give you a better idea if you want to make that change or not.

_____________________________

Hope this helps.
Paul

(in reply to sscc)

Post #: 5