Quote:> Is there a way to specify what BDCs will be logon points in SMS 2.0. In
> 1.2 it was possible to add servers individually as logon servers without
> having to specify the entire domain.
We're having a problem with promoting many of our BDC's to CAP's. Each of
our BDC's have been successfully installed as SMS Logon Points. We have a
very large client base spread across many WAN links in addition to a large
client seat on a local Ethernet LAN (over 1500 clients in total).
We have successfully promoted one of our BDC's on the local LAN to a CAP,
however we are experiencing a failure whenever we attempt to promote any of
our remaining BDC's, which generally (but not strictly) speaking are on the
opposite side of WAN links.
Using SMSTrace to view the SITECOMP.LOG file on our Central Site Server we
can watch the successful transmission of the appropriate CAP files from the
Central Site Server to the BDC, and even confirm that the CAP_Sxx directory
and all of its appropriate subdirectories are created on the BDC. The
following SITECOMP.LOG entry shows where things start to go wrong....
Starting service SMS_SERVER_BOOTSTRAP_SMS01 with command-line arguments "S01
F:\SMS /install \\SVR1\F$\SMS\bin\i386\smsexecd.exe...
SMS_SITE_COMPONENT_MANAGER 5/7/99 9:29:49 AM 292 (0x124)
Followed immediately by this failure...
Execution of "\\SVR1\F$\SMS\bin\i386\smsexecd.exe /install
/siteserver:SMS01" on server SVR1 failed: Could not establish a connection
to the site server using the SMS Service Connect Account.
SMS_SITE_COMPONENT_MANAGER ### 169 (0xA9)
Bootstrap operation failed. SMS_SITE_COMPONENT_MANAGER 5/7/99 9:30:09 AM
The SITE_COMPONENT_MANAGER then continuously and unsuccessfully retries with
every polling cycle. It is worth mentioning again that this exact error
message is showing up with each and every BDC Logon Point that we attempt to
promote to a CAP. (except for the server name of course which is specific
to the server).
This error message also appears when we attempt to "roll-back" the CAP
installation by de-selecting the role change. The only difference is that
there is a "/deinstall" switch provided to the command rather than an
"/install" switch. They both fail...
If anyone has seen this error, or can shed some additional light on the
problem it would be greatly appreciated.
We are working with MS on this one and will post back if/when we get a fix.