Dear all, I would like to seek your opinion about the design of SCCM 2007 as the following information. - Site A 1,000 clients : where the IT team located - Site B 1,600 clients : Does not have IT admin - Site C ,D, E and F: 100 clients for each site: Does not have IT admin The available traffic between Site A and Site B is 3.5 Mbps The available traffic between Site A and Site (C,D,E and F) is 1 Mbps Firstly, I plan Site A as primary site and Site B, C, D,E and F as secondary site. However, I concern about the number of client 1,600 client on Site B, which might be huge for secondary site. Which option should be better between option 1 and option 2: Option 1: Site A will be primary site and other sites (B,C,D,E and F) will be secondary site reporting to Site A - Site A will have 3 servers: ( 1 server for AD, DNS, DHCP), (1 server for SCCM Primary Site with all site system role except NAP) and (1 server for SCCM Database) - Other Site (B,C,D,E and F) will be 1 servers with hyper-V enablement, which has (1 VM as AD, DNS, DHCP) and (1 VM for SCCM secondary site with MP and DP) Option 2: Site A will be centeral site, Site B will be primary site and Site C,D,E and F will be secondary site reporting to Site A - Site A will have 3 servers: ( 1 server for AD, DNS, DHCP), (1 server for SCCM Primary Site with all site system role except NAP) and (1 server for SCCM Database) - Site B will have 1 Server (3 VMs): (1 VM for AD), (1 VM for SCCM ), (1 VM for SCCM Database server) - Site C,D,E and F will have 1 server (2 VMs): (1 VM for AD), (1 VM for SCCM with MP and DP) Hardware on site B will be higher specification than the one on site C,D,E and F Thanks in advance, U37TCP

No easy answer on this. I would stick with Option 2 though. Assuming the values you provided is the capacity reserved for ConfigMgr related traffic. If not you will first need to check the available bandwidth. Check all other communications happening on these lines. What features of ConfigMgr are you going to use (OSD/ SoftwareUpdates)? Some thoughts: 1600 Clients is not too much for a secondary site. But you have to keep in mind that all 1600 in fact report to the primary server at Site A (although compressed via secondary server if MP is installed). You could also manage A and B with one primary Site Site B can be managed from Site A. There is no need for IT Staff at Site B. I would also consolidate ConfigMgr & Database on one machine(Site A and B). As they will be virtual machines, there is no benefit of separating them. Traffic will have to be Scheduled/Throttled on the addresses for all sites. You could place a SUP in each site to further reduce the traffic (Updates Scanning) Miguel Rodriguez

I would place a secondary site in all remote sites, 1800 shouldn't be a problem.Kent Agerlund | My blogs: http://blog.coretech.dk/author/kea/ and http://scug.dk/ | Twitter @Agerlund | Linkedin: /kentagerlund

Hello Miguel, I would like to start with thanks for helping clarification. Please allow me to ask one more time as follows: The traffic values I provided above plan to reserve for SCCM. Customer plan to use majority on software deployment, Patch Management and for OSD will not focus on Site C,D,E and F and will be utilize on Site A and B. 1600 Clients is not too much for a secondary site. But you have to keep in mind that all 1600 in fact report to the primary server at Site A (although compressed via secondary server if MP is installed). You could also manage A and B with one primary Site - (u37tcp) When you said "You could also manage A and B with one primary Site", you mean we configure only site A as Primary Site and Site B qw secondary site ? I would also consolidate ConfigMgr & Database on one machine(Site A and B). As they will be virtual machines, there is no benefit of separating them. - (u37tcp) For Site A, there is no virtualization environment. We have 3 physical servers (1 for AD, 1 for SCCM and 1 for SCCM Database). Do you agree to separate physical server for SCCM and its database? - For Site B, it will be virtualized so you recommend to consolidate to be 2 VMs ( 1 for AD, 1 for SCCM with SQL database) Am I right? You could place a SUP in each site to further reduce the traffic (Updates Scanning) - This is what I first thought to install SUP on each site but I think the traffic generated by scanning is not much so I plan not to install SUP on each site. My first thought is not correct right? Thanks & Regards, U37TCP

1. (u37tcp) When you said "You could also manage A and B with one primary Site", you mean we configure only site A as Primary Site and Site B qw secondary site ? No - just one primary for both locations. You would need a DP at site B to keep package transfers local. 2. For Site A, there is no virtualization environment. We have 3 physical servers (1 for AD, 1 for SCCM and 1 for SCCM Database). Do you agree to separate physical server for SCCM and its database? - For Site B, it will be virtualized so you recommend to consolidate to be 2 VMs ( 1 for AD, 1 for SCCM with SQL database) Am I right? One server in both scenarios. Keep SQL & ConfigMgr on one machine. 3. This is what I first thought to install SUP on each site but I think the traffic generated by scanning is not much so I plan not to install SUP on each site. My first thought is not correct right? Traffic for Client scans will be directly transferred to the primary SUP if you have no local SUP. I cannot tell about the data volume though. see this thread: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/configmgrsetup/thread/a79b066e-705c-4807-8a2b-e66dd83eb542Miguel Rodriguez