Multiple Management Servers Problem
Updated: 22 May 2010 | 4 comments
I have made a new installation from scratch of two SEP (one site - two different cities 4mbps wan connection) management servers along with a dedicated SQL Server 2005 Std on one of the two cities set up as load balancing scenario.
I've made all the neccesary settings regarding server priority in order to have clients from one city connect to their own server and change to the other server only when their server fails.
THE PROBLEM.
The first server shows in the management console the details about the latest virus defs while the second says information currently unavailable. All other information (policies-groups etc show correctly). The second server does not have directories with virus defs at all.
discussion Filed Under:
Comments
Similar problem here. I updated one of my sites from 11.0.2010 to 4000. 'Latest Manager Version: Information is currently unavailable' appears on the HOME tab. Also, the clients can not update Virus definitions from this mangement server.
Theses clients can update from other management servers across the WAN at different sites. The client applications can also update if I change the settings and alow users to initiate Live Update.
I have clean wiped the server, removed the content from the install location that doesn't go away, rebooted, and installed the management console again. I have uninstalled Live Update, completely removed Live Update content, rebooted and installed live Update again as well. Neither of these solutions have solved either issue.
Hi
I think we dont have the same problem.
I have one site, two managemet servers and what I am getting regardless of MR3 or MR4 version (tried them both) is "Latest Symantec Version: Information is currently unavailable"
which means I have connectivity between the two management servers regarding groups policies etc but the second management server does not have virus defs updates and info about them so the clients canno get them from the server I intended originally.
I opened a case and the answer was "This is the expected behaviour. We tried itin a lab configuration and show exactly the same behaviour"
I wonder why have LOAD BALANCING & FAILOVER configuration If the second server is expected to not have the required definitions to give to the clients in case of failure or load balancing????
Unanswered questions both in the forum and the Support case I opened.
Way to go symantec great support.
have you added the proxy settings for these secondary site in the management console ?
m00
SEPM needs a high speed low latency link (ie LAN) between it and the database, otherwise strange things can happen - this is potentially what you are seeing here.
Paul Murgatroyd
Principal Product Manager, Symantec Endpoint Protection
Endpoint twitter feed: http://twitter.com/symc_endpoint
Would you like to reply?
Login or Register to post your comment.