OpsMgr 2007: Port requirements for SCOM agents in a DMZ
Here's another interesting issue I came across the other day that I thought I would share with you just in case you happen to find yourself in a similar situation. Hopefully if you do then this will help you get all this working the way it should.
Scenario: An RMS in a parent domain and client agents that are domain controllers in a child domain in a DMZ.
The manual agent install goes fine on the clients but the agents never appear in the operators console despite Review New Manual agent installations in pending management View and Auto–approve New manually installed agents settings in SETTINGS—SECURITY –GENERAL.
The following event shows up on the agents:
Event Type: Error
Event Source: OpsMgr Connector
Event Category: None
Event ID: 20070
Computer: DC
Description: The OpsMgr Connector connected to <domain>, but the connection was closed immediately after authentication occurred. The most likely cause of this error is that the agent is not authorized to communicate with the server, or the server has not received configuration. Check the event log on the server for the presence of 20000 events, indicating that agents which are not approved are attempting to connect.
This event shows up on the server:
Event Type: Error
Event Source: OpsMgr Connector
Event Category: None
Event ID: 20002
Description: A device at IP <addr> attempted to connect but could not be authenticated, and was rejected.
None of the agents show up in any of the following tables under Opsmgrdb:
Dbo.Mt_Computer
Dbo.Mt_healthservice
Dbo.Mt_healthservicewatcher
dbo.AgentPendingActions
The following powershell command returns nothing:
get-agentpendingaction
The product documentation does not talk much about this scenario other than having port 5723 open from the agent to the server:
https://technet.microsoft.com/da-dk/library/cc540431(en-us).aspx
Regardless, what I’ve found is that we also need to have port 88 and port 389 opened between the agent and the RMS if they’re separated by a firewall. This has worked for me just about every time I’ve found myself in this situation.
Hope this helps,
Rohit Kaul
Comments
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hi,What does tcp port 88 used for? I have another problem about the firewall. the RMS and the clients are in the same domain but they were separated by the isa 2006.I have opened the protocols such as to join a computer to the domain and tcp port 5723.and now I am use an action account as a member of a domain admins,but i can't install the agents to the client because of the rpc unreachable.I try to open tcp port 135 and 1024 plus ports,but no results ,What another ports should I opened?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Feed: The Operations Manager Support Team Blog Here's another interesting issue I came across theAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Check this one out here ======================== Agent push requirements (including firewall ports): The account being used to push the agent must have local admin rights on the targeted agent machine. The following ports must be open: RPC endpoint mapper Port number: 135 Protocol: TCP/UDP *RPC/DCOM High ports (2000/2003 OS) Ports 1024-5000 Protocol: TCP/UDP *RPC/DCOM High ports (2008 OS) Ports 49152-65535 Protocol: TCP/UDP NetBIOS name service Port number: 137 Protocol: TCP/UDP NetBIOS session service Port number: 139 Protocol: TCP/UDP SMB over IP Port number: 445 Protocol: TCP MOM Channel Port number: 5723 Protocol: TCP/UDP The following services must be set: Display Name: Netlogon Started Auto Running **Display Name: Remote Registry Started Auto Running Display Name: Windows Installer Started Manual Running Display Name: Automatic Updates Started Auto Running Extracted from : http://blogs.technet.com/kevinholman/archive/2007/12/12/agent-discovery-and-push-troubleshooting-in-opsmgr-2007.aspxAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Feed: The Operations Manager Support Team Blog Here's another interesting issue I came across theAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Feed: The Operations Manager Support Team Blog Posted on: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:38 AM AuthorAnonymous
April 20, 2012
The comment has been removedAnonymous
October 07, 2014
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 03, 2015
The comment has been removed