[isalist] Re: TMG Unsupported
- From: Jim Harrison <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 19:07:46 +0000
Actually, there has always been an "unsupported" context to every MS product,
but previously, there was a large push to "never say anything negative".
Sadly, this "always positive" mentality bit us in the supportability butt
because customers would do something (somtimes silly, sometimes simply
ignorant) and be told "that's not supported"; to which they'd inevitably (and
rightly) respond "where did you tell me that before this call?".
..Now we tell you up front what you can and cannot do. It's supposed to help
you. <VBG>
________________________________
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of
John Wilson [john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 10:42 AM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] Re: TMG Unsupported
I read the list of unsupported scenarios. While I agree there is a certain
extent of necessity of unsupported configs due to the changes in underlying
code /technologies, to me, this reads off on a wrong note.
It's almost like Microsoft has taken a "You have to a given configuration, or
else the product is not supported." attitude. In the past, I think they have
been more of a "technology empowers business" attitude. The shift in mentality,
for this piece of product documentation at least, bothers me.
Hey, this may be just me reading it the wrong way, but if I was using ISA 2006
in organization, I could see where the decision makers would look at the list
of unsupported configurations and say, "ISA and TMG costs a lot in liscensing,
and seems like it isn't as flexible as the older product. Let's look at other
options."
That may or may not be a fair statement. But if I showed the documentation to
certain people, I'm sure the project to upgrade wouldn't get approved.
As far as 32-bit 2003 to 64-bit 2008 with no direct upgrade path, that sucks.
But its the same issue users faced migrating from Exchange 2003 to Exchange
2007. So it's not a new thing. It's to be expected for certain products if you
want to take advantage of the 64-bit architecture.
John Wilson
________________________________
From: Jim Harrison <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wed, December 23, 2009 1:05:35 PM
Subject: [isalist] Re: TMG Unsupported
Since you're interested in maintaining service during the change from ISA to
TMG, you can't use an in-place upgrade anyway. At some point in any in-place
upgrade process, that server is off-line. No getting around it.
Have you ever considered a rolling upgrade?
At most, it costs you 1 or 2 extra servers (that can be included or repurposed
afterwards) and allows you to "silently" move your users from one deployment to
another.
If you do this on virtual deployments, it's even easier.
Chapter 6 in the TMG book (also to be a sample chapter) is dedicated to this
thought process and offers an example of "rolling" from ISA 2006 SE to TMG EE.
..it's only as hard as you choose to make it.
________________________________
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of
D PIETRUSZKA USWRN INTERLINK INFRA SHIFT MGR [DPietruszka@xxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 9:57 AM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] Re: TMG Unsupported
For the OS don’t use excuses, Microsoft always did the same with ISA and lately
with a lot of other products just to force you to migrate to 64 bits or 2008.
And the instances, I have 14 (well there are 2 others not really in use) ISAs
servers in total, believe me I would find out a way to continue protecting the
network or providing proxy service while migrating other boxes.
It is just a pain in …. to always do the same thing, that is why I promised
last time to don’t migrate to the next ISA version, the pain that was move from
2004 to 2006 was not worth the advantages on the new version.
Believe me I’m closer to look for other products rather than upgrading, that is
why I would like to read about the advantages.
Regards
Diego R. Pietruszka
MIS - Shift Manager
MSC (USA) - Interlink Transport Technologies
Direct Phone: (908)605-4147
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Jim Harrison
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 12:45 PM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] Re: TMG Unsupported
When you figure out how to do an "in place upgrade" from WS03 x86 to WS08 x64,
you let us know?
..oh; and while you're at it, be sure to describe how the ISA 2006 instance is
to continue operating (necessary for an in-place upgrade) on WS08 x64?
Seriously; some in-place changes just aren't possible.
________________________________
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of
D PIETRUSZKA USWRN INTERLINK INFRA SHIFT MGR [DPietruszka@xxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 9:41 AM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] Re: TMG Unsupported
Is there any link with a description of the advantages or new features of TMG
over ISA2006? I want to see if playing the crappy Microsoft game of never offer
an in place upgrade is worth or not the effort.
Thanks
Regards
Diego R. Pietruszka
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Thor (Hammer of God)
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 12:33 PM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] Re: TMG Unsupported
Shouldn’t one say “TMG is not supported on ‘certain’ editions” rather than “on
all editions? It makes it sound like every edition of 2008 is not supported.
t
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Jim Harrison
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 6:29 AM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] TMG Unsupported
We just published the “unsupported stuff” for TMG on TechNet.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee796231.aspx is your link of
reference.
Other related posts:
