Michael

Generally speaking also, a restart of the DHCP Server service is normally suffice, rather than the whole server. I have numerous 2016 servers with the DHCP role working happily, so I wonder if there are other problems? Depending on your setup, (if using Hyper-V), should be easy enough to setup a new instance and point clients to look at it instead.

Another possibility of course is to delete and re-create the scope altogether, best out of hours also.

I agree, you need to check your scope, but also the distribution pool which could be set to anything. I presume reverse DNS zones have been configured in DNS server?

Given you're going to re-image all machines, I'd leave all existing devices pointing to your old WSUS instance and anything imaged to your new WSUS instance. Setting up WSUS is very easy - on 2012/2016 it's a built in role and all wizard based. Just select a volume with a healthy amount of space (100GB minimum). You can select just Windows 10 as an option, but there are loads to consider such as MS Office too. You can use Item Level Targeting, this hasn't changed one bit. In the context of Windows 10 there's Feature and Quality upgrades - I'd focus on Quality upgrades as a starting point. You also need to enable a range of GPOs to give you more control. You can view that here.

LTSB = Long Term Servicing Branch - Google it for specific details, but it doesn't include Apps, doesn't have Feature Updates, only Quality Updates for 10 years (valid till 2026).

I use IE and Chrome - Edge isn't great at the moment and has a long way to go to be Enterprise ready!

Have a look here Alternatively, deploy LTSB '16 (based on 1607), will also never upgrade.

Have a look at icacls. Should be possible to script and automate this, even for hundreds/thousands of users.

GuyJD's response is interesting - what OS are these notebooks running? Windows 7 or Windows 10?

According to Intel's site, these are dual band cards. Just 'n' rather than 'ac' but it would still work.

From a machine perspective yes, from a driver perspective absolutely not (until the newly released signed drivers). I've had zero problems reported.

Do you mean the models? You could contact a RISO leasing company.

The WHQL drivers have been released on the US site here They installed on the server and deployed on the client as expected - no issues, but time will tell in the next few days!

The other consideration of course is the overall throughput - RAID5 delivers better performance than a single drive, as of course the data is split across the array. Software RAID could be an option, but running a Hyper-V configuration would typically be slow - even worse if running a database of some kind!

The way I look at it is like this - Implementing a Hyper-V arrangement, means you're saving money elsewhere having so many physical servers in your organisation (including the likes of disks), so why go to the whole expense of setting up a redundant/fail over solution, yet cut corners on the medium where data is stored? It makes absolutely no sense at all. I'd rather have a single/robust Hyper-V solution with RAID and not have the fail over solution at all, rather than two physical hosts with one physical disks. It's not something I've ever encountered or considered as an option.

The bear minimum is RAID1 per server given the choice. I'd never have a single disk server.

Not entirely sure how the "Turn off access to all Windows Update features" is any different from "Do not connect to any Windows Update Internet locations" - pretty much the same thing and both disable driver updates too. There doesn't appear to be a way of only using WU/MU for driver only updates it seems; all or nothing!

Possibly and they could cross check that. Would make sense I suppose.

I'll have to test some more, but without "Do not connect to any Windows Update Internet locations", Windows 10 still checks with MU, despite a WSUS intranet update location being specified. The GPO description also matches what I've concluded - "Even when Windows Update is configured to receive updates from an intranet update service, it will periodically retrieve information from the public Windows Update service to enable future connections to Windows Update, and other services like Microsoft Update or the Windows Store." I also have Feature Updates set to CBB, with 180 day period set. Quality Updates left at 'Not Configured'. Not entirely sure why Microsoft have made this simple process complicated. In some scenarios, without the "Do not connect to any Windows Update Internet locations" policy set, we've also seen Sysprep magically request we download the latest Feature Upgrade and appears to ignore other policies set. The computer object is in the right location, as specified in the answer file. Enabling "Do not connect to any Windows Update Internet locations" solves this issue, but is now restricting access to Device Manager driver upgrades. Is it then perfectly possible to have full control of Feature/Quality Updates, with full access to driver updates (which I have little/no issue with)? Just can't see a way around it.

Thing is (which I've never really understood) - insurance companies request an estimated number of miles, yet they don't request your existing mileage at the point of insurance application. So how do they know for sure if you've gone over your quota? Simply dividing the mileage but the age of the car is neither accurate or practical, so how do they do it?

As above, the school are the legal owner, but the LA still have to process requests. The alternative of course is to ditch the .sch.uk domain wherever possible and register something more generic/applicable to the school, which is fairly common with Academies.

It's a bit daft though isn't it? I want to restrict Feature/Quality updates accordingly, but allow the device to install drivers from Microsoft Update. Not entirely sure it's possible?

Have to say though, the only frustrating part of enabling "Do not connect to any Windows Update Internet locations", is that it also blocks connections to Microsoft Update in regards to Device Manager. Not sure there's a solution to this, other than moving machines in and out of GPOs, in the event I cannot track a driver?

I'd suggest re-copying over a new GPO store, as I can't think of any reason why Store should be missing.

Do you have any GPO filters applied?