Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of operationsIT
operationsIT

asked on

WSUS v.s. Branch Cache for Updates

Hello EE,

Currently we have a WSUS server for deploying Microsoft updates.  Corporate is wanting to migrate to using branch cache at our facility saying the first update would come from their server and subsequent updates from the local branch cache.  I am used to administering WSUS so want to know pros/cons of moving to Branch Cache when corporate is in another country.
Avatar of Mark Bill
Mark Bill
Flag of Ireland image

I dont like Branch Cache personally having just undergone the 2012 exam which I have learned alot from it including setting it up in labs etc.

To put my feeling on it into a short statement I would say that I will be leaving Branch Cache until 2015 Server at the earliest due to it being a new MS product and id only then expect a lot of the bugs and inadequacies to be ironed it.

This especially rings true for a big company operating overseas. I would stick to a policy of WSUS and SCCM(for urgent only deployments) if you have these options available at present.

The biggest issue with Branch Cache is the overhead on administration for what is a brand new system that nobody even knows if it will be around in 4 years time. Way to early for a big company to implement especially if you have a perfectly working infrastructure right now.
You are looking at it a bit incorrectly I think; it's not an either or.

Maybe I'm mis-reading your question a bit, but you'll still be running WSUS.  All branch cache does is store files locally on a server or client so they don't need to be fetched over a WAN link.

And this is not a new product.  It was introduced with Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2.  It's five or six years old at this point.

As has been said though, it does require admin effort.

There quite a bit of information on it here:

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd425028.aspx

Jim.
True regarding 2008. ;). an oversight. Im not sure its 5 years old though tbh!

It really is hard for me to imagine a scenario where Branch Cache is actually beneficial honestly. Even in a large file sharing company I just cannot see any relevant use for it.
<<True regarding 2008. ;). an oversight. Im not sure its 5 years old though tbh! >>

 I just checked; released 2009...time marches on<g>.

<<It really is hard for me to imagine a scenario where Branch Cache is actually beneficial honestly.>>

 Probably not as worthwhile as it once was as internet connectivity has improved.  But still even today, it's common practice to copy files out to a remote site on one station, then copy/install to the rest from there.  

 Branch cache makes that automatic, but it does need to be managed.  Guess it depends if working that way will be the "norm" or a one time deal.  Also the requirements are high.   It was only Windows 7 ultimate that had it I believe and only a few of the high end server OS's.   I'm sure all the details are in the link I posted.

I think though if it were me, I'd just put in a down stream WSUS server.   But without knowing the details, Branch cache may be a lot more flexible for the situation despite the overhead.

Jim.
Avatar of operationsIT
operationsIT

ASKER

Hello,

The scenario is we currently have a downstream WSUS server where in the branch (corporate to North America) can administer updates on the server.  Corporate is recommending branch cache as a way to improve updates and I am having a hard time seeing that as it will only take away our ability in the branch to administer updates, thus requiring us to go overseas to corporate and with the time difference work out any issues.  Trying to determine true benefits if any to go branchcache?  Pros of staying downstream
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Avatar of Jim Dettman (EE MVE)
Jim Dettman (EE MVE)
Flag of United States of America image

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
WSUS is a method to control what machine gets what.
Branchcache is a p2p content sharing system. In a ultra-high speed network, BranchCache will not be needed but WSUS will be.
Hello Jim,

They are trying to take ability to administer updates away from our branch by saying it would improve updates (removing our downstream WSUS), but I only see not having the ability to effectively support local users from the local branch inefficient and ineffective given corporate is 6 hours away.
<<They are trying to take ability to administer updates away from our branch >>

 um, but if your on a downstream WSUS server already, their already controlling your updates.

Jim.
Why should every branch have its own list of patch approvals?
Can we not approve patches on the downstream server?  If not, what advantage would moving us to BranchCache for updates offer over what we are running now?

@Nagendra, not all branches have their own list of patch approvals, only our location as we are corporate for North America, but our branches do not.
<<Can we not approve patches on the downstream server?  >>

 Yes, but your only seeing the patches they let you see unless I'm remembering that wrong.  So their already in semi-control of the patch process.

 You get to approve patches listed and control groups, but that's only on what the upstream server has.

Jim.
Thanks for all the information