|
|
I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must have
Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why since
AD is not feasible to this network.
Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any of
my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates and
download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
|
|
Why is AD not feasible on the network?
I have AD set up for my network of 5 computers. Mostly because I want to
learn, but its not causing any ill effects.
Sam
On 5/16/07 9:41 PM, in article
C88A84B6-5FBC-4B2E-831D-A5FC4BAF7718[ at ]microsoft.com, "Ghost Writer"
<GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
> once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must have
> Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why since
> AD is not feasible to this network.
>
> Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any of
> my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates and
> download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
> supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
|
|
You can either use regedits similar to
-----file wsus.reg begins after this line------
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate]
"WUServer"="http://wsus:8530"
"WUStatusServer"="http://wsus:8530"
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate\AU]
"NoAutoUpdate"=dword:00000000
"AUOptions"=dword:00000004
"NoAutoRebootWithLoggedOnUsers"=dword:00000001
"RescheduleWaitTime"=dword:0000001e
"ScheduledInstallDay"=dword:00000000
"ScheduledInstallTime"=dword:00000010
"UseWUServer"=dword:00000001
"LastWaitTimeout"=-
"DetectionStartTime"=-
------wsus.reg ends before this line------
check the options.
or (I haven't tried this, working from theory)
add the wuadm template to the local policy of PC's.
However, I'm as curious as Sam. Just why is AD 'not feasible' for a 10
station network? I quoted today to move three workgroup PC's to an SBS based
AD for classic reasons, central storage and backup, mail held centrally but
available universally, centralised user management, degrees of access (yes,
one principle and two trusted long term employees yet the principle can see
benefit to restricted access).
To me a 10 station workgroup is too difficult to manage to be feasible.
"Sam Wynens" <indy[ at ]indy1979.com> wrote in message
news:C271421D.23F7%indy[ at ]indy1979.com...
[Quoted Text] > Why is AD not feasible on the network?
>
> I have AD set up for my network of 5 computers. Mostly because I want to
> learn, but its not causing any ill effects.
>
> Sam
>
>
> On 5/16/07 9:41 PM, in article
> C88A84B6-5FBC-4B2E-831D-A5FC4BAF7718[ at ]microsoft.com, "Ghost Writer"
> <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>> I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
>> once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must
>> have
>> Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why
>> since
>> AD is not feasible to this network.
>>
>> Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any
>> of
>> my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates
>> and
>> download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
>> supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
>
|
|
Ghost Writer wrote:
[Quoted Text] > I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and
> not once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming
> I must have Active Directory installed for this to function, but I
> want to know why since AD is not feasible to this network.
AD is not required. It is benificial for the distribution of Windows Update
settings through group policy. Even with AD, manual WU settings are
possible.
>
> Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on
> any of my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available
> updates and download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should
> have. If WSUS supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to
> set it up.
Only approved updates are (fully) downloaded and installed according to the
settings you implement. You can opt for automatic approval of some updates.
--
/kj
|
|
On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
<GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[Quoted Text] >I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
>once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must have
>Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why since
>AD is not feasible to this network.
>
>Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any of
>my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates and
>download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
>supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you can
browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in the WSUS
console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved updates
from your WSUS server.
--
Dave Mills
There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that don't.
|
|
It is possibe for you to manage each machine independantly an to approve each
update per machine if you choose to go there. The way to do that is to:
1. Create a group for each machine in the WSUS Admin
2. Place each machine in the group you want
3. Approve updates for each group.
One issue, the Username/password for the service on the WSUS and the
individual machines needs to be the same and have Admin rights. In a
workgroup this poses a problem as there is no single security providor. A
domain provides a single security providor for all of the machines in the
domain. If it is a security issue, you can still use AD but secure the
priviliges and security of the machines and users using Group Policies and
USs. This can be tricky but with GOOD Documentation and planning it can be
done.
WSUS was designed with a single security account in mind that had the rights
to install updates to multiple machines.
If all of this does not work for you, then turn off Auto Updates and walk
around from machine to machine and apply the updates from a network share
that only you have access to.
Sincerely,
"DaveMills" wrote:
[Quoted Text] > On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
> <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> >I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
> >once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must have
> >Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why since
> >AD is not feasible to this network.
> >
> >Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any of
> >my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates and
> >download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
> >supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
>
>
> Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you can
> browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in the WSUS
> console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved updates
> from your WSUS server.
> --
> Dave Mills
> There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that don't.
>
|
|
Thyere are other tools you canbuy that will perform the same task and
possibly more, just bring money.
"Kevin" wrote:
[Quoted Text] > It is possibe for you to manage each machine independantly an to approve each
> update per machine if you choose to go there. The way to do that is to:
> 1. Create a group for each machine in the WSUS Admin
> 2. Place each machine in the group you want
> 3. Approve updates for each group.
>
> One issue, the Username/password for the service on the WSUS and the
> individual machines needs to be the same and have Admin rights. In a
> workgroup this poses a problem as there is no single security providor. A
> domain provides a single security providor for all of the machines in the
> domain. If it is a security issue, you can still use AD but secure the
> priviliges and security of the machines and users using Group Policies and
> USs. This can be tricky but with GOOD Documentation and planning it can be
> done.
>
> WSUS was designed with a single security account in mind that had the rights
> to install updates to multiple machines.
>
> If all of this does not work for you, then turn off Auto Updates and walk
> around from machine to machine and apply the updates from a network share
> that only you have access to.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> "DaveMills" wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
> > <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > >I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
> > >once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must have
> > >Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why since
> > >AD is not feasible to this network.
> > >
> > >Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any of
> > >my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates and
> > >download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
> > >supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
> >
> >
> > Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you can
> > browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in the WSUS
> > console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved updates
> > from your WSUS server.
> > --
> > Dave Mills
> > There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that don't.
> >
|
|
Kevin wrote:
[Quoted Text] > It is possibe for you to manage each machine independantly an to approve each
> update per machine if you choose to go there. The way to do that is to:
> 1. Create a group for each machine in the WSUS Admin
> 2. Place each machine in the group you want
> 3. Approve updates for each group.
>
> One issue, the Username/password for the service on the WSUS and the
> individual machines needs to be the same and have Admin rights. In a
> workgroup this poses a problem as there is no single security providor. A
> domain provides a single security providor for all of the machines in the
> domain. If it is a security issue, you can still use AD but secure the
> priviliges and security of the machines and users using Group Policies and
> USs. This can be tricky but with GOOD Documentation and planning it can be
> done.
>
> WSUS was designed with a single security account in mind that had the rights
> to install updates to multiple machines.
Where did you get the information that the above is required? It is NOT
a requirement of WSUS for each machine connecting to the WSUS server
have the same username and password. I've been using WSUS since release
in a non-AD environment without needing to do this.
>
> If all of this does not work for you, then turn off Auto Updates and walk
> around from machine to machine and apply the updates from a network share
> that only you have access to.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> "DaveMills" wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
>> <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
>>> once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must have
>>> Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why since
>>> AD is not feasible to this network.
>>>
>>> Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any of
>>> my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates and
>>> download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
>>> supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
>>
>> Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you can
>> browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in the WSUS
>> console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved updates
>> from your WSUS server.
>> --
>> Dave Mills
>> There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that don't.
>>
|
|
Yes, my patch testing machines are in VMWare and are not members of the
domain, there is no relationship between accounts on these PC's and any
domain accounts.
AFAIK _all_ comms between the client and WSUS server are anonymous http/s.
"Wade Godfrey" <wade[ at ]lcsd.logan.k12.ut.us> wrote in message
news:OJM%23sbKmHHA.1388[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
[Quoted Text] >
>
> Kevin wrote:
>> It is possibe for you to manage each machine independantly an to approve
>> each update per machine if you choose to go there. The way to do that is
>> to:
>> 1. Create a group for each machine in the WSUS Admin
>> 2. Place each machine in the group you want
>> 3. Approve updates for each group.
>>
>> One issue, the Username/password for the service on the WSUS and the
>> individual machines needs to be the same and have Admin rights. In a
>> workgroup this poses a problem as there is no single security providor.
>> A domain provides a single security providor for all of the machines in
>> the domain. If it is a security issue, you can still use AD but secure
>> the priviliges and security of the machines and users using Group
>> Policies and USs. This can be tricky but with GOOD Documentation and
>> planning it can be done.
>>
>> WSUS was designed with a single security account in mind that had the
>> rights to install updates to multiple machines.
>
> Where did you get the information that the above is required? It is NOT a
> requirement of WSUS for each machine connecting to the WSUS server have
> the same username and password. I've been using WSUS since release in a
> non-AD environment without needing to do this.
>
>>
>> If all of this does not work for you, then turn off Auto Updates and walk
>> around from machine to machine and apply the updates from a network share
>> that only you have access to.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> "DaveMills" wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
>>> <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and
>>>> not once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I
>>>> must have Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want
>>>> to know why since AD is not feasible to this network.
>>>>
>>>> Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on
>>>> any of my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available
>>>> updates and download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should
>>>> have. If WSUS supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to
>>>> set it up.
>>>
>>> Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you
>>> can
>>> browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in
>>> the WSUS
>>> console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved
>>> updates
>>> from your WSUS server.
>>> --
>>> Dave Mills
>>> There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that
>>> don't.
>>>
|
|
"DaveMills" wrote:
[Quoted Text] > On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
> <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> >I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
> >once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must have
> >Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why since
> >AD is not feasible to this network.
> >
> >Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any of
> >my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates and
> >download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
> >supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
>
>
> Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you can
> browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in the WSUS
> console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved updates
> from your WSUS server.
> --
> Dave Mills
> There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that don't.
>
Yes, I was expecting a web based interface similar to MS update. It just
seams more feasible for me to be able to do it this way. Why else require it
to use IIS if not to implement some sort of intranet web site?
"Sam Wynens" wrote:
> Why is AD not feasible on the network?
>
> I have AD set up for my network of 5 computers. Mostly because I want to
> learn, but its not causing any ill effects.
>
> Sam
AD is not feasible because all the computers are not mine. See, I live in
and manage a rental house, college students rent rooms here and I provide
them with internet access. Also, I am a custom system builder. Of the 10 or
so computers here, only 4 are mine (2 desktops, 1 server, and 1 laptop). The
rest belong to the renters and I was trying to set up WSUS so when I build a
new machine and install the updates I don't have to wait over an hour for
them to download from Microsoft. It used to take in excess of 2 hours but I
have cached several stand alone files line the .net ones. It would be so much
easier if I had my own WSUS server which can get all the updates off my own
server. I average 2 to 4 custom builds a month.
|
|
IIS is used by the automatic update service itself, http is the transfer
method from the WSUS server to the client.
I actually would have prefered MS to have stayed with the http management
interface. (People who know me are now fainting, in general I prefer
'applications' to http anything).
You actually have a _legal_ rather than deployment problem. It is quite easy
to implement what you desire (see other posts) but to do so I believe you
would need to enter an ASP agreement with MS. Though your WSUS clients are
all under one roof you are not legally entitled to redistribute patches to
them. (actually, this is more of a financial problem, those ASP agreements
are damned expensive)
OK, you have a reasonable excuse for not implementing AD for the transient
machines.
"Ghost Writer" <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:440D0689-EFDA-46D3-815C-FE4509872B96[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] >
> "DaveMills" wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
>> <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and
>> >not
>> >once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must
>> >have
>> >Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why
>> >since
>> >AD is not feasible to this network.
>> >
>> >Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on
>> >any of
>> >my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates
>> >and
>> >download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
>> >supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
>>
>>
>> Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you
>> can
>> browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in the
>> WSUS
>> console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved
>> updates
>> from your WSUS server.
>> --
>> Dave Mills
>> There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that
>> don't.
>>
>
> Yes, I was expecting a web based interface similar to MS update. It just
> seams more feasible for me to be able to do it this way. Why else require
> it
> to use IIS if not to implement some sort of intranet web site?
>
>
> "Sam Wynens" wrote:
>
>> Why is AD not feasible on the network?
>>
>> I have AD set up for my network of 5 computers. Mostly because I want to
>> learn, but its not causing any ill effects.
>>
>> Sam
>
> AD is not feasible because all the computers are not mine. See, I live in
> and manage a rental house, college students rent rooms here and I provide
> them with internet access. Also, I am a custom system builder. Of the 10
> or
> so computers here, only 4 are mine (2 desktops, 1 server, and 1 laptop).
> The
> rest belong to the renters and I was trying to set up WSUS so when I build
> a
> new machine and install the updates I don't have to wait over an hour for
> them to download from Microsoft. It used to take in excess of 2 hours but
> I
> have cached several stand alone files line the .net ones. It would be so
> much
> easier if I had my own WSUS server which can get all the updates off my
> own
> server. I average 2 to 4 custom builds a month.
|
|
OH, I believe http is also still used by the management interface. MMC just
hides it, think.
"SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <not[ at ]your.nellie> wrote in message
news:eGUN8mOmHHA.4772[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
[Quoted Text] > IIS is used by the automatic update service itself, http is the transfer
> method from the WSUS server to the client.
>
> I actually would have prefered MS to have stayed with the http management
> interface. (People who know me are now fainting, in general I prefer
> 'applications' to http anything).
>
> You actually have a _legal_ rather than deployment problem. It is quite
> easy to implement what you desire (see other posts) but to do so I believe
> you would need to enter an ASP agreement with MS. Though your WSUS clients
> are all under one roof you are not legally entitled to redistribute
> patches to them. (actually, this is more of a financial problem, those ASP
> agreements are damned expensive)
>
> OK, you have a reasonable excuse for not implementing AD for the transient
> machines.
>
> "Ghost Writer" <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:440D0689-EFDA-46D3-815C-FE4509872B96[ at ]microsoft.com...
>>
>> "DaveMills" wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
>>> <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and
>>> >not
>>> >once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must
>>> >have
>>> >Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why
>>> >since
>>> >AD is not feasible to this network.
>>> >
>>> >Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on
>>> >any of
>>> >my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates
>>> >and
>>> >download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
>>> >supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
>>>
>>>
>>> Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you
>>> can
>>> browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in
>>> the WSUS
>>> console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved
>>> updates
>>> from your WSUS server.
>>> --
>>> Dave Mills
>>> There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that
>>> don't.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I was expecting a web based interface similar to MS update. It just
>> seams more feasible for me to be able to do it this way. Why else require
>> it
>> to use IIS if not to implement some sort of intranet web site?
>>
>>
>> "Sam Wynens" wrote:
>>
>>> Why is AD not feasible on the network?
>>>
>>> I have AD set up for my network of 5 computers. Mostly because I want to
>>> learn, but its not causing any ill effects.
>>>
>>> Sam
>>
>> AD is not feasible because all the computers are not mine. See, I live in
>> and manage a rental house, college students rent rooms here and I provide
>> them with internet access. Also, I am a custom system builder. Of the 10
>> or
>> so computers here, only 4 are mine (2 desktops, 1 server, and 1 laptop).
>> The
>> rest belong to the renters and I was trying to set up WSUS so when I
>> build a
>> new machine and install the updates I don't have to wait over an hour for
>> them to download from Microsoft. It used to take in excess of 2 hours but
>> I
>> have cached several stand alone files line the .net ones. It would be so
>> much
>> easier if I had my own WSUS server which can get all the updates off my
>> own
>> server. I average 2 to 4 custom builds a month.
>
>
|
|
On Thu, 17 May 2007 17:54:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
<GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[Quoted Text] >
>"DaveMills" wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
>> <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
>> >once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must have
>> >Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to know why since
>> >AD is not feasible to this network.
>> >
>> >Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any of
>> >my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available updates and
>> >download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have. If WSUS
>> >supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
>>
>>
>> Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you can
>> browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in the WSUS
>> console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved updates
>> from your WSUS server.
>> --
>> Dave Mills
>> There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that don't.
>>
>
>Yes, I was expecting a web based interface similar to MS update. It just
>seams more feasible for me to be able to do it this way. Why else require it
>to use IIS if not to implement some sort of intranet web site?
WU/MU are web sites that the client downloads from. Implementing WSUS as a web
server means that the change required on the client is to simply point to a
different web server.
>
>
>"Sam Wynens" wrote:
>
>> Why is AD not feasible on the network?
>>
>> I have AD set up for my network of 5 computers. Mostly because I want to
>> learn, but its not causing any ill effects.
>>
>> Sam
>
>AD is not feasible because all the computers are not mine. See, I live in
>and manage a rental house, college students rent rooms here and I provide
>them with internet access. Also, I am a custom system builder. Of the 10 or
>so computers here, only 4 are mine (2 desktops, 1 server, and 1 laptop). The
>rest belong to the renters and I was trying to set up WSUS so when I build a
>new machine and install the updates I don't have to wait over an hour for
>them to download from Microsoft. It used to take in excess of 2 hours but I
>have cached several stand alone files line the .net ones. It would be so much
>easier if I had my own WSUS server which can get all the updates off my own
>server. I average 2 to 4 custom builds a month.
--
Dave Mills
There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and those that don't.
|
|
SuperGumby [SBS MVP] wrote:
[Quoted Text] > OH, I believe http is also still used by the management interface.
> MMC just hides it, think.
>
> "SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <not[ at ]your.nellie> wrote in message
> news:eGUN8mOmHHA.4772[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> IIS is used by the automatic update service itself, http is the
>> transfer method from the WSUS server to the client.
>>
>> I actually would have prefered MS to have stayed with the http
>> management interface. (People who know me are now fainting, in
>> general I prefer 'applications' to http anything).
>>
>> You actually have a _legal_ rather than deployment problem. It is
>> quite easy to implement what you desire (see other posts) but to do
>> so I believe you would need to enter an ASP agreement with MS.
>> Though your WSUS clients are all under one roof you are not legally
>> entitled to redistribute patches to them. (actually, this is more of
>> a financial problem, those ASP agreements are damned expensive)
Not to mention that WSUS clients require a Windows Server CAL and if WSUS is
using a full SQL server, a SQL CAL is also needed.
>>
>> OK, you have a reasonable excuse for not implementing AD for the
>> transient machines.
>>
>> "Ghost Writer" <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> message news:440D0689-EFDA-46D3-815C-FE4509872B96[ at ]microsoft.com...
>>>
>>> "DaveMills" wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:00 -0700, Ghost Writer
>>>> <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers
>>>>> and not
>>>>> once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming
>>>>> I must have
>>>>> Active Directory installed for this to function, but I want to
>>>>> know why since
>>>>> AD is not feasible to this network.
>>>>>
>>>>> Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto
>>>>> update on any of
>>>>> my computers. I want to log on and check the list of available
>>>>> updates and
>>>>> download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have.
>>>>> If WSUS supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to
>>>>> set it up.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that
>>>> you can
>>>> browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions
>>>> in the WSUS
>>>> console and the clients then use automatic update to get the
>>>> approved updates
>>>> from your WSUS server.
>>>> --
>>>> Dave Mills
>>>> There are 10 type of people, those that understand binary and
>>>> those that don't.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I was expecting a web based interface similar to MS update. It
>>> just seams more feasible for me to be able to do it this way. Why
>>> else require it
>>> to use IIS if not to implement some sort of intranet web site?
>>>
>>>
>>> "Sam Wynens" wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why is AD not feasible on the network?
>>>>
>>>> I have AD set up for my network of 5 computers. Mostly because I
>>>> want to learn, but its not causing any ill effects.
>>>>
>>>> Sam
>>>
>>> AD is not feasible because all the computers are not mine. See, I
>>> live in and manage a rental house, college students rent rooms here
>>> and I provide them with internet access. Also, I am a custom system
>>> builder. Of the 10 or
>>> so computers here, only 4 are mine (2 desktops, 1 server, and 1
>>> laptop). The
>>> rest belong to the renters and I was trying to set up WSUS so when I
>>> build a
>>> new machine and install the updates I don't have to wait over an
>>> hour for them to download from Microsoft. It used to take in excess
>>> of 2 hours but I
>>> have cached several stand alone files line the .net ones. It would
>>> be so much
>>> easier if I had my own WSUS server which can get all the updates
>>> off my own
>>> server. I average 2 to 4 custom builds a month.
--
/kj
|
|
|
|
"Ghost Writer" <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:440D0689-EFDA-46D3-815C-FE4509872B96[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] >> Are you expecting WSUS to have a Web site like Windows Update that you
>> can
>> browse to and get the updates. It does not. You make all decisions in the
>> WSUS
>> console and the clients then use automatic update to get the approved
>> updates
>> from your WSUS server.
> Yes, I was expecting a web based interface similar to MS update. It just
> seams more feasible for me to be able to do it this way. Why else require
> it
> to use IIS if not to implement some sort of intranet web site?
Two words: WEB SERVICES
--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
Independent WSUS Evangelist
MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
Everything you need for WSUS is at
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/technologies/featured/wsus/default.mspx
And, almost everything else is at
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
.....
|
|
|
|
"Ghost Writer" <GhostWriter[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C88A84B6-5FBC-4B2E-831D-A5FC4BAF7718[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] >I have set up WSUS four times on my network of under 10 computers and not
> once have I been able to get any computer updated. I am assuming I must
> have
> Active Directory installed for this to function,
Active Directory is *not* required, but it sure makes life a heck of a lot
easier!
> but I want to know why since
> AD is not feasible to this network.
Most likely cause is because the client systems are not properly configured
to use WSUS.
> Before you respond please know that I refuse to set up auto update on any
> of
> my computers.
Welll. (a) Running the Automatic Updates service is *required* in order to
have WSUS functionality.
> I want to log on and check the list of available updates and
> download the ones I want, not the ones MS thinks I should have.
Then you're not a candidate for WSUS. Continue using Windows Update, while
sitting at the keyboard of each of the computers in your organization.
> If WSUS
> supports this method, it is well hidden so I ask how to set it up.
Obviously you've not read any of the WSUS documentation. I suggest you start
with the WSUS Overview to properly determine if WSUS is an appropriate
solution for your desired objectives.
--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
Independent WSUS Evangelist
MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
Everything you need for WSUS is at
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/technologies/featured/wsus/default.mspx
And, almost everything else is at
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
.....
|
|
|