Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 10 replies
  • Subscribers 1 subscriber
  • Views 3122 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Remote site takeover with SEC

MawfTech

Hi all, need some suggestions please.

Got a remote site that's had a standalone SEC 3.1 deploying v7.6 SAV to a CID and then clients in that office that update from that. All is well with this and running fine.

Obviously, I now want to migrate these to v9.5 as v7.6 is end of life shortly. The local server is not man enough for (and I don't want it to be destroyed by)  SEC4.x console and UM so I've deployed a CID from HQ down to the branch office via our own SEC 4.0 installation. The CID works fine and I can install new installations from it without any problem.

Now, the bit that's stumped me. From my SEC 4 console, I can 'find' machines in the branch office and they appear in the unassigned section. I've created a new group for this branch and configured updating pointing at my shiney new v9.5 CID. Only problem I have is that when I drag a machine from unassigned to the relevant group and it auto runs 'protect', feed in sufficient credentials........nothing :( Machine continues to update and inform the local SEC. Even if I remove the machine from the local SEC prior, a protect is simply ignored. I can happily protect machines that have never been part of that branch office SEC but I cannot grab control of a machine that has already seen the local SEC.

Without wanting to simply uninstall each client and reinstall from the new CID, is there an easy way to redirect a machine to the HQ SEC? Tech support are working on this too but at the moment seem dumbstruck by the question - guess I have to wait for it to escalate to get anywhere there.

Matt

:5975


This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0

    Hi Jak,

    "For the first, the SEC server addresses the client using the NetBIOS name.  When you are at the SEC server and you do:

    \\<remoteclient>\

    Go into the scheduled tasks and create a task, are you using the IP, FQDN or NetBIOS to reference the remote client?

    Are you doing this as the same account as the one you enter in the protection wizard?"

    Yep, way beyond you there Jak. Task schedule works fine. Same credentials kicks off task no problem. Can remotely create, run and view results of tasks on remote machine (have full domain admin rights over it). RPC all fine, remote registry all fine. Seems to be built into SEC that it must query remote machine first (possibly why it needs remote registry access) and check if it's already managed and then simply reject at that point not bothering to deploy the install task.

    The initial reject maybe because it's querying the registry keys you describe so I'll try this bit by bit and if I figure out why, report back to this thread. Might be as simple as deleting the key then reprotect from the console. Tech support have got nowhere with this, their solution is uninstall everything then protect - not particularly great response but predictable.

    Matt

    :6025
Reply
  • 0

    Hi Jak,

    "For the first, the SEC server addresses the client using the NetBIOS name.  When you are at the SEC server and you do:

    \\<remoteclient>\

    Go into the scheduled tasks and create a task, are you using the IP, FQDN or NetBIOS to reference the remote client?

    Are you doing this as the same account as the one you enter in the protection wizard?"

    Yep, way beyond you there Jak. Task schedule works fine. Same credentials kicks off task no problem. Can remotely create, run and view results of tasks on remote machine (have full domain admin rights over it). RPC all fine, remote registry all fine. Seems to be built into SEC that it must query remote machine first (possibly why it needs remote registry access) and check if it's already managed and then simply reject at that point not bothering to deploy the install task.

    The initial reject maybe because it's querying the registry keys you describe so I'll try this bit by bit and if I figure out why, report back to this thread. Might be as simple as deleting the key then reprotect from the console. Tech support have got nowhere with this, their solution is uninstall everything then protect - not particularly great response but predictable.

    Matt

    :6025
Children
No Data
Unfiltered HTML