upgrading from SMS 2.0

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:

upgrading from SMS 2.0

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 >> upgrading from SMS 2.0

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

upgrading from SMS 2.0 - 11/6/2008 7:49:46 PM

aash

Posts: 2
Score: 0
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline

I have an SMS 2.0 site that I would like to upgrade and was wondring if I can install a fresh copy of SMS 2003 side by side to my SMS 2.0 and make the 2003 as the parent site for my 2.0 site. Is there a document somewhere on how to do that?

Post #: 1

RE: upgrading from SMS 2.0 - 11/6/2008 8:36:44 PM

skissinger

Posts: 2293
Score: 145
Joined: 9/13/2001
From: Sherry Kissinger
Status: offline

Planning and Deployment Guide: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc179958.aspx

Yes, you can have a 2.0 site be a child of a 2003 site. Essentially, you need a sender at each site to the other one, and for ease of security (there are other ways, but this is easiest), add the computer account of the 2.0 computer to the local Administrators group of the 2003 computer, and vice versa.

I'm probably missing some key things... I haven't looked at 2.0 since 2003... memory fading.

fyi, I'm hoping your planning your 2003 hardware to be upgraded to ConfigMgr as soon as you can remove the 2.0 site, right?

_____________________________

mofmaster@smsexpert.com (version 2007) | http://www.smsexpert.com | http://www.sccmexpert.com
My Blog
Microsoft MVP - ConfigMgr

(in reply to aash)

Post #: 2

RE: upgrading from SMS 2.0 - 11/6/2008 9:20:31 PM

aash

Posts: 2
Score: 0
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline

So would the install of SMS 2003 would create the sender on both sites or only on the 2003 site. By the way thanks for your answer it is very much appreciated

(in reply to skissinger)

Post #: 3