I am testing the trial downlaod of the K1000 & K2000

Having gone through the initial setup I can not sem to push out the client.
The K1 & K2 virtual boxes are running from the same W7 box, (fresh install)

Having read the install guide I can confirm the following for the, would be, client PC:
.NET 1.1SP1 installed
Simple file sharing - off
Antivirus - off
Windows XP firewall - off
port 139 (TCP) open
port 445 (TCP&UDP) open

client PC can browse to share on K1000 and read/copy package
client PC can ping K1000 virtual box
K1000 host PC server can ping client
Provisioning config:
Have tried by passing post detection

Any suggestions???

Provisioning Results as follows:

IP Address: [client IP address]
MAC Address: (unknown)
Host Name (from DNS): [client PC name]
Suspected OS (from scan): unknown
Action: Agent Install
Provisioning Status: failed
K1000 Agent Installed: No
Error Category: No Error

Record Created: 2011/11/21 15:44:58
Record Last Modified: 2011/11/21 15:44:58

Provisioning Log



[11/21/11 03:43:00 PM] Begin provisioning...
[11/21/11 03:43:00 PM] Executing Windows platform provisioning.
[11/21/11 03:43:00 PM] Probing tcp ports for accessibility.
[11/21/11 03:43:00 PM] Port 139 [netbios-ssn] open
[11/21/11 03:43:00 PM] Port 445 [microsoft-ds] open


[11/21/11 03:43:09 PM] Executing remote communications:

Initializing RPC
Connecting to ADMIN$
Copying service file
Disconnecting ADMIN$
Connecting to IPC$


Creating service
Opening pipe to service
Sending commands
Sending login credentials
This installation package could not be opened. Contact the application vendor to verify that this is a valid Windows Installer package.
exit code: 1620Removing service
Connecting to ADMIN$
Deleting service file
Disconnecting ADMIN$


End of remote communications.
[11/21/11 03:43:09 PM] End provisioning run.
Answer Summary:
1 Comment   [ + ] Show Comment


  • I thought I better add, that the reason it stopped deploying in the first place was an bug in version 6. It was a known issue. The manual entry was changing the Kbox's DNS pointer from "kbox name " to "IP address"
Please log in to comment

Rating comments in this legacy AppDeploy message board thread won't reorder them,
so that the conversation will remain readable.


When you see "1620Removing service" in your deployment log, this (in my experience) describes a situation where your account requires UAC approval to install software. This is due to the agent install needing to install a service on the client side.

There are a number of ways to circumvent this, but the two most common in trial environments are:
1. Deploy via GPO:

2. Install the agent manually from the SMB share. You can find it at:
Answered 11/21/2011 by: scottlutz
Orange Senior Belt

Please log in to comment
Do you happen to have the UAC still on? That could prevent deployment of the agent.
Answered 11/21/2011 by: ms01ak
Tenth Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment
the client PC is XPxp3 so no UAC
surley it would have no affect on the K1000 host PC as its running the host in a virtual environment

I was hoping to not use logon scripts / GPO etc I would like to use the K1000 as intended, its stupposed to self deploy :/
Answered 11/21/2011 by: KaseUser
Orange Senior Belt

Please log in to comment
FWIW, if it was my network I would be using GPO. There are a lot of benefits to leveraging a system that is already trusted. Agent provisioning is primarily there for those that don't have such options. It can also be a performance gain (or lack of drain) from your kbox. Once the agent is installed then you get all those benefits because it is now got a lot of power running as the SYSTEM user.

That said, what version are you trying to deploy here? Do you have the .net checkbox on here? What is your XP machines' ntlm level at? Can they run the msi file from \\kbox\client\blah using the same creds you used during the provisioning?
Answered 11/23/2011 by: GillySpy
Seventh Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment

a bit more info on this for clarity, to fix this I needed to change the k1000 server name from [Server Name} to IP address in the provisioning schedule.

Apparently this is a known bug in Version 6.0

Answered 06/12/2014 by: KaseUser
Orange Senior Belt

Please log in to comment
Answer this question or Comment on this question for clarity