RMS client via AU: did I miss something?

Hi to all.
On 28 November 2006 my WSUS received the Windows Rights Management Services
client with SP2 package. Thanks to the "detect only" approval status, I
noticed that the package has been designed to be deployed to all systems
(both client and server OS).
It sounded me VERY STRANGE, since it is not an everyday hotfix but a full
piece of software! So I decided to wait for some announcements on the WSUS
team blog or on the RMS website, then I looked for anything about it on
public newsgroups, but it seems that nobody paid attention on this
"world-class" deployment process (I found only this post:
news://news.microsoft.com/0836107E-0...@microsoft.com).

My question is: why MSFT announced far in advance the IE7 deployment, and
then it does not says a word about this smaller, but not less important
deployment?

Thanks to everyone for any reply!

Andrew

Hi Andrew,

You are seeing this behavior in WSUS? The RMS client should be not offered
via WSUS because it is not considered a critical update. We are
investigating this.

The RMS client is offered on Windows Update and Microsoft Update to Windows
2000 and Windows XP computer as a Optional/Recommended update. It's also
available on the Microsoft Download Center.

Thanks.
Brian

--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.


"Andrew" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi to all.
> On 28 November 2006 my WSUS received the Windows Rights Management
> Services
> client with SP2 package. Thanks to the "detect only" approval status, I
> noticed that the package has been designed to be deployed to all systems
> (both client and server OS).
> It sounded me VERY STRANGE, since it is not an everyday hotfix but a full
> piece of software! So I decided to wait for some announcements on the WSUS
> team blog or on the RMS website, then I looked for anything about it on
> public newsgroups, but it seems that nobody paid attention on this
> "world-class" deployment process (I found only this post:
> news://news.microsoft.com/0836107E-0...@microsoft.com).
>
> My question is: why MSFT announced far in advance the IE7 deployment, and
> then it does not says a word about this smaller, but not less important
> deployment?
>
> Thanks to everyone for any reply!
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>

"Brian Lich [MSFT]" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi Andrew,
>
> You are seeing this behavior in WSUS? The RMS client should be not
> offered via WSUS because it is not considered a critical update. We are
> investigating this.
>

In effect the description I read in WSUS admin was saying that it was a
"Service Pack" update, but when I noticed from reports that all machines
were needing this update, I approved and installed it on a few PC and
servers for testing purposes. I can confirm you that the package contains
the full RMS client with SP2.

> The RMS client is offered on Windows Update and Microsoft Update to
> Windows 2000 and Windows XP computer as a Optional/Recommended update.
> It's also available on the Microsoft Download Center.
>
> Thanks.
> Brian

Thanks to you, Brian.
Waiting to read something about it, maybe on the WSUS team blog!

Andrew

>
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
>
>
> "Andrew" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Hi to all.
>> On 28 November 2006 my WSUS received the Windows Rights Management
>> Services
>> client with SP2 package. Thanks to the "detect only" approval status, I
>> noticed that the package has been designed to be deployed to all systems
>> (both client and server OS).
>> It sounded me VERY STRANGE, since it is not an everyday hotfix but a full
>> piece of software! So I decided to wait for some announcements on the
>> WSUS
>> team blog or on the RMS website, then I looked for anything about it on
>> public newsgroups, but it seems that nobody paid attention on this
>> "world-class" deployment process (I found only this post:
>> news://news.microsoft.com/0836107E-0...@microsoft.com).
>>
>> My question is: why MSFT announced far in advance the IE7 deployment, and
>> then it does not says a word about this smaller, but not less important
>> deployment?
>>
>> Thanks to everyone for any reply!
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Looking at WSUS today, RMS SP2 is part of the Windows product updates, and is
not a critical update.

The detection logic shows that it basically checks for the existence of
msdrm.dll and the version. If the file exists, and its over the version
required then it will update you. Its not going to update you if you don't
have it.

This is the list of files it replaces:

0 msdrm.dll 323696 \WINNT\system32\
1 SecProc.dll 518768 \WINNT\system32\
2 RmActivate.exe 523376 \WINNT\system32\
3 SecProc_ssp.dll 192624 \WINNT\system32\
4 RmActivate_ssp.exe 358000 \WINNT\system32\
5 SecProc_isv.dll 519280 \WINNT\system32\
6 RmActivate_isv.exe 531568 \WINNT\system32\
7 SecProc_ssp_isv.dll 192624 \WINNT\system32\
8 RmActivate_ssp_isv.exe 354416 \WINNT\system32\
9 MsDrmV1.cat 10525 \WINNT\system32\DRM\
10 Eula.rtf 68048 \WINNT\system32\DRM\ENU\

So RMS SP2 had alot of changes, which I'm sure requires a full release, as
all of the files that ship with it have to be signed into its manifest in
order for it to work.

- Jason



"Jason Tyler" wrote:

> WSUS is not just for Critical updates. It is for service packs and regular
> updates as well. It essentially is a small business replacement for the
> Windows Update site.
>
> Since the RMS client will/is shipping out of the box for Vista, it is now a
> part of the Windows product. I assume this is why its going in as a Windows
> update.
>
> I have not looked at the detection logic for the RMS SP2 package, or the
> package itself to see what it contains, but I'll have a look today to see. I
> would suspect that it will only upgrade machine that has SP1 installed
> already, but if not, then we need to
> definately get a better picture of the finer details of this update. I'm
> sure that there is not a 'delta' build for this (and even if you have
> selected this option in WSUS, some packages just don't have delta builds).
>
> -Jason
>
> "Brian Lich [MSFT]" wrote:
>
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > You are seeing this behavior in WSUS? The RMS client should be not offered
> > via WSUS because it is not considered a critical update. We are
> > investigating this.
> >
> > The RMS client is offered on Windows Update and Microsoft Update to Windows
> > 2000 and Windows XP computer as a Optional/Recommended update. It's also
> > available on the Microsoft Download Center.
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Brian
> >
> > --
> > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> >
> >
> > "Andrew" <> wrote in message
> > news:...
> > > Hi to all.
> > > On 28 November 2006 my WSUS received the Windows Rights Management
> > > Services
> > > client with SP2 package. Thanks to the "detect only" approval status, I
> > > noticed that the package has been designed to be deployed to all systems
> > > (both client and server OS).
> > > It sounded me VERY STRANGE, since it is not an everyday hotfix but a full
> > > piece of software! So I decided to wait for some announcements on the WSUS
> > > team blog or on the RMS website, then I looked for anything about it on
> > > public newsgroups, but it seems that nobody paid attention on this
> > > "world-class" deployment process (I found only this post:
> > > news://news.microsoft.com/0836107E-0...@microsoft.com).
> > >
> > > My question is: why MSFT announced far in advance the IE7 deployment, and
> > > then it does not says a word about this smaller, but not less important
> > > deployment?
> > >
> > > Thanks to everyone for any reply!
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >

"Jason Tyler" <> wrote in message
news:ADDD177D-91A8-4BB9-AD20-...
> Looking at WSUS today, RMS SP2 is part of the Windows product updates, and
> is
> not a critical update.
>
> The detection logic shows that it basically checks for the existence of
> msdrm.dll and the version. If the file exists, and its over the version
> required then it will update you. Its not going to update you if you don't
> have it.
>

Both my client and server machines have no msdrm.dll file, but the update
detection process show me that the "update" (the full RMS client + SP2
install) needs to be deployed to that machines... anyone else can confirm
this behaviour?

> This is the list of files it replaces:
>
> 0 msdrm.dll 323696 \WINNT\system32\
> 1 SecProc.dll 518768 \WINNT\system32\
> 2 RmActivate.exe 523376 \WINNT\system32\
> 3 SecProc_ssp.dll 192624 \WINNT\system32\
> 4 RmActivate_ssp.exe 358000 \WINNT\system32\
> 5 SecProc_isv.dll 519280 \WINNT\system32\
> 6 RmActivate_isv.exe 531568 \WINNT\system32\
> 7 SecProc_ssp_isv.dll 192624 \WINNT\system32\
> 8 RmActivate_ssp_isv.exe 354416 \WINNT\system32\
> 9 MsDrmV1.cat 10525 \WINNT\system32\DRM\
> 10 Eula.rtf 68048 \WINNT\system32\DRM\ENU\
>
> So RMS SP2 had alot of changes, which I'm sure requires a full release, as
> all of the files that ship with it have to be signed into its manifest in
> order for it to work.
>
> - Jason
>

I believe that a full-release upgrade to a new product should be showed as
necessary by the WSUS update detection process only if an old release of the
product is installed on the AU client machines. If it would be ever
necessary to use the Microsoft Update process to distribute a new
software/feature to all Windows machine in the world, I hope that Microsoft
guys would have the kindness to let us be informed, to give us the chance to
decide IF, WHEN and HOW to do it!

I think there has been only a mistake in the process of distributing that
RMS update, but I'll be glad if MSFT would say something more about this
issue. :-)

Andrew

In looking at the detection logic again today, you are correct. Apparently we
look for the presence of msdrm.dll, and its version. If it is SP2 we don't
install. If it is NOT SP2 we offer it as installable, if you have it or not.

I'm looking into it, and will keep you posted.

I posted a file manifest and update to this on my blog if anyone is
interested.

http://blogs.technet.com/rmssupp

Thanks.

-Jason

"Andrew" wrote:

> "Jason Tyler" <> wrote in message
> news:ADDD177D-91A8-4BB9-AD20-...
> > Looking at WSUS today, RMS SP2 is part of the Windows product updates, and
> > is
> > not a critical update.
> >
> > The detection logic shows that it basically checks for the existence of
> > msdrm.dll and the version. If the file exists, and its over the version
> > required then it will update you. Its not going to update you if you don't
> > have it.
> >
>
> Both my client and server machines have no msdrm.dll file, but the update
> detection process show me that the "update" (the full RMS client + SP2
> install) needs to be deployed to that machines... anyone else can confirm
> this behaviour?
>
> > This is the list of files it replaces:
> >
> > 0 msdrm.dll 323696 \WINNT\system32\
> > 1 SecProc.dll 518768 \WINNT\system32\
> > 2 RmActivate.exe 523376 \WINNT\system32\
> > 3 SecProc_ssp.dll 192624 \WINNT\system32\
> > 4 RmActivate_ssp.exe 358000 \WINNT\system32\
> > 5 SecProc_isv.dll 519280 \WINNT\system32\
> > 6 RmActivate_isv.exe 531568 \WINNT\system32\
> > 7 SecProc_ssp_isv.dll 192624 \WINNT\system32\
> > 8 RmActivate_ssp_isv.exe 354416 \WINNT\system32\
> > 9 MsDrmV1.cat 10525 \WINNT\system32\DRM\
> > 10 Eula.rtf 68048 \WINNT\system32\DRM\ENU\
> >
> > So RMS SP2 had alot of changes, which I'm sure requires a full release, as
> > all of the files that ship with it have to be signed into its manifest in
> > order for it to work.
> >
> > - Jason
> >
>
> I believe that a full-release upgrade to a new product should be showed as
> necessary by the WSUS update detection process only if an old release of the
> product is installed on the AU client machines. If it would be ever
> necessary to use the Microsoft Update process to distribute a new
> software/feature to all Windows machine in the world, I hope that Microsoft
> guys would have the kindness to let us be informed, to give us the chance to
> decide IF, WHEN and HOW to do it!
>
> I think there has been only a mistake in the process of distributing that
> RMS update, but I'll be glad if MSFT would say something more about this
> issue. :-)
>
> Andrew
>
>
>

"Jason Tyler" <> wrote in message
news:4D562B69-A48D-4FEC-B8B5-...
> In looking at the detection logic again today, you are correct. Apparently
> we
> look for the presence of msdrm.dll, and its version. If it is SP2 we don't
> install. If it is NOT SP2 we offer it as installable, if you have it or
> not.
>

Both if it is NOT SP2 or NOT RMS client at all, WSUS does not "offer it as
installable", but it marks AU clients as "needing updates"... it is a bit
different, from my point of view. ;-)

> I'm looking into it, and will keep you posted.
>
> I posted a file manifest and update to this on my blog if anyone is
> interested.
>
> http://blogs.technet.com/rmssupp
>

Thanks you very much for your support, Jason!
Waiting to read the end of this issue ASAP...

Andrew


> Thanks.
>
> -Jason
>
> "Andrew" wrote:
>
>> "Jason Tyler" <> wrote in message
>> news:ADDD177D-91A8-4BB9-AD20-...
>> > Looking at WSUS today, RMS SP2 is part of the Windows product updates,
>> > and
>> > is
>> > not a critical update.
>> >
>> > The detection logic shows that it basically checks for the existence of
>> > msdrm.dll and the version. If the file exists, and its over the version
>> > required then it will update you. Its not going to update you if you
>> > don't
>> > have it.
>> >
>>
>> Both my client and server machines have no msdrm.dll file, but the update
>> detection process show me that the "update" (the full RMS client + SP2
>> install) needs to be deployed to that machines... anyone else can confirm
>> this behaviour?
>>
>> > This is the list of files it replaces:
>> >
>> > 0 msdrm.dll 323696 \WINNT\system32\
>> > 1 SecProc.dll 518768 \WINNT\system32\
>> > 2 RmActivate.exe 523376 \WINNT\system32\
>> > 3 SecProc_ssp.dll 192624 \WINNT\system32\
>> > 4 RmActivate_ssp.exe 358000 \WINNT\system32\
>> > 5 SecProc_isv.dll 519280 \WINNT\system32\
>> > 6 RmActivate_isv.exe 531568 \WINNT\system32\
>> > 7 SecProc_ssp_isv.dll 192624 \WINNT\system32\
>> > 8 RmActivate_ssp_isv.exe 354416 \WINNT\system32\
>> > 9 MsDrmV1.cat 10525 \WINNT\system32\DRM\
>> > 10 Eula.rtf 68048 \WINNT\system32\DRM\ENU\
>> >
>> > So RMS SP2 had alot of changes, which I'm sure requires a full release,
>> > as
>> > all of the files that ship with it have to be signed into its manifest
>> > in
>> > order for it to work.
>> >
>> > - Jason
>> >
>>
>> I believe that a full-release upgrade to a new product should be showed
>> as
>> necessary by the WSUS update detection process only if an old release of
>> the
>> product is installed on the AU client machines. If it would be ever
>> necessary to use the Microsoft Update process to distribute a new
>> software/feature to all Windows machine in the world, I hope that
>> Microsoft
>> guys would have the kindness to let us be informed, to give us the chance
>> to
>> decide IF, WHEN and HOW to do it!
>>
>> I think there has been only a mistake in the process of distributing that
>> RMS update, but I'll be glad if MSFT would say something more about this
>> issue. :-)
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>

"Jason Tyler" <> wrote in message
news:4D562B69-A48D-4FEC-B8B5-...
> In looking at the detection logic again today, you are correct. Apparently
> we
> look for the presence of msdrm.dll, and its version. If it is SP2 we don't
> install. If it is NOT SP2 we offer it as installable, if you have it or
> not.
>
> I'm looking into it, and will keep you posted.
>
> I posted a file manifest and update to this on my blog if anyone is
> interested.
>
> http://blogs.technet.com/rmssupp
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Jason
>

So, do you have any news? We are still waiting for an "official" response
from Microsoft, or at least a "silent" fix of that update's behaviour in
WSUS!

Andrew

Andrew wrote:

> So, do you have any news? We are still waiting for an "official" response
> from Microsoft, or at least a "silent" fix of that update's behaviour in
> WSUS!

The latter seems to have happened - the update is now showing "not needed" for
all my clients.

Harry.

"Harry Johnston" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Andrew wrote:
>
>> So, do you have any news? We are still waiting for an "official" response
>> from Microsoft, or at least a "silent" fix of that update's behaviour in
>> WSUS!
>
> The latter seems to have happened - the update is now showing "not needed"
> for all my clients.
>
> Harry.

I've just tested the new "detection logic" on my infrastructure too...
finally, all seems to be ok.

Thanks to all who made this working!

Andrew