Kace- Replication Shares and RSAs
There has been some discussion in my office about replication shares. We currently have about 16,000 machines. Of these 5,000 machines get software pushes every month or so ranging from 300 MB - 800 MB in size. We will be utilizing patching here in the next few months as well, moving off of our current patching solution for those 5,000.
My question is this. Is there anyone that chooses not to use replication shares, and if so why? Can you describe your machine count, and environment? How often are you doing pushes with an average file size.
The same question for those of you that do utilize them... machine count, environment, bandwith, how many do you have.
The same for RSAs if used.
I am aware of the setup, and what both Rep Shares and RSAs do. I'm just looking for a general consensus here.
Community Chosen Answer
as soon you have more than one branch a replication share is a MUST HAVE.
RSA depending on the company. If you have your own IT staff in each branch office it is a good idea, but if you have centralized IT staff, a RSA might not be needed.
My test environment and also our second net is not counting, I don't use both here, as the environment is way too small for it.
Bundling both on the same system is a smart idea but I don't really like the idea, because the RSA should reside on a virtualization box and the virtualization of a NAS is not always a good idea.