Re: Windows XP Service Pack 2
From: Roger Abell [MVP] (mvpNoSpam_at_asu.edu)
Date: 05/04/04
- Next message: Roger Abell [MVP]: "Re: Need help recovering EFS encryped files"
- Previous message: Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media]: "Re: Overwhelmed"
- In reply to: Will Denny: "Re: Windows XP Service Pack 2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 11:37:31 -0700
but what Will ?
-- Roger "Will Denny" <willdenny@mvps.org> wrote in message news:%23x$7DbfMEHA.3988@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... >I posted the link to SP2 NGs, but... > > -- > > Will Denny > MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User > > > "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNoSpam@asu.edu> wrote in message > news:OL0ZpDfMEHA.3016@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > | You should be posting SP 2 feedback to the SP 2 newsgroups. > | > | Each point of concern you have mentioned is taken into account > | in the planned SP 2 release. There are updates to adm files for > | control of the autoupdate and firewall features in SP 2. You will > | be able to continue use of your Sus. Once Wus releases you > | will have improved control and reporting of update delivery also. > | > | When you are editing a GPO you must pay attention to the policy > | annotations that state to what client OS version the policy is > | applicable. All W2k policies work everywhere, but there are XP > | policies that do not work (nor do harm) on Wk2, and also W2k3 > | policies that do not work (nor do harm) on W2k or XP. > | > | It sounds to me like you should get comfortable with using GPO > | as this is the vehicle for controlling XP SP 2 features in a corp > | world. If you have not yet, you should start using GPMC also. > | > | -- > | Roger Abell > | Microsoft MVP (Windows Server System: Security) > | MCDBA, MCSE W2k3+W2k+Nt4 > | "Gary van Heerden" <gheerden@hotmail.com> wrote in message > | news:u%23utQReMEHA.628@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > | > Let me start by saying that I totally support what you guys are doing, > but > | > I > | > have to ask if you have given proper consideration to what the effects > are > | > going to be for large corporate environments... > | > > | > Here in Africa bandwidth comes at a huge premium, and we simply can't > | > afford > | > the amounts of bandwidth that you guys can, with a network of 10,000 > | > users, > | > it is very very expensive. > | > > | > > | > > | > By turning on auto update, or enforcing the decision to do this, you > are > | > directly causing systems to go and be updated individually; this now > means > | > that I have 10, 000 clients connecting to Windows update and trying to > | > download the latest patch, lets use MS04 -011 which is 6.5 Meg, and > the > | > problem becomes unmanageable, my ISA server will cache the patch which > | > prevents it from traversing the Internet link, but it must now > traverse > my > | > WAN 9000 times. > | > > | > > | > > | > We currently use SUS very effectively, and our WAN traffic is minimal > due > | > to > | > this apart from the traveling users that now pull their updates across > the > | > WAN, DFS does not solve this problem for me, and if it can help I > would > | > like > | > to know how. > | > > | > > | > > | > I am assuming that I can control this via GPO's and that I can > override > | > the > | > setting that the user chooses, however I have been burnt by GPO's > | > already, > | > and have noticed that in my environment, Windows 2000 AD 2000 that > many > | > GPO > | > settings that are available with tools like GPMC which are 2003 tools > | > settings made have no effect. > | > > | > > | > > | > I therefore have to ask if I make these GPO changes if they will > actually > | > take effect on the XP desktops. > | > > | > > | > > | > The next big concern I have is on the XP SP2 Firewall. > | > > | > As stated above, I have no control over this with my 2000 GPO's and by > | > turning on the firewall in XP SP2 you are going to prevent management > | > systems like SMS from connecting to these devices that we are trying > to > | > manage. I will be unable to even ping the device because by default > ICMP > | > is > | > turned off. > | > > | > I will be unable to remotely manage these devices, and things like > file > | > sharing, (which I consider a pain) will stop working, I am now going > to > be > | > inundated with helpdesk calls regarding allowing certain traffic types > and > | > users are probably going to simply click the top option (because they > | > don't > | > understand) which turns the rule off. > | > > | > > | > > | > Very simply put, what tools are you putting at my disposal to manage > this > | > environment, and protecting the users from themselves, as well as > helping > | > me > | > protect my WAN and the associated traffic level increases I am going > to > | > see.??? > | > > | > > | > > | > Thanks > | > > | > Gary > | > > | > > | > | >
- Next message: Roger Abell [MVP]: "Re: Need help recovering EFS encryped files"
- Previous message: Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media]: "Re: Overwhelmed"
- In reply to: Will Denny: "Re: Windows XP Service Pack 2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
