Can't install Eset Remote Administration Server

[cl00m]

Hi,

I'm trying to install in first place ERA Server on my Windows 2003 server, but during installation it stops and rolls back, in the log I can read that :

<2009-03-02 14:06:13> Instaling services
<2009-03-02 14:06:13> RegisterSnmpAgent: Entered
<2009-03-02 14:06:13> Cannot retrieve SNMP agent paths
<2009-03-02 14:06:14> InstallAbort: Entered

How can I resolve this issue ?

thx

[cl00m]

Ok I've found the solution, I've uninstalled snmp service and reinstalled it.

Worked like a charm ...

[CTech]

Having the same problem. Checked the SNMP service and it's running, but the problem continues to occur.

What else should be checked? Tried turning firewall off, same problem.

2003 sp2

[SmackyTheFrog]

Run regmon and have it filter on activity on the installer process. Let it go until it throws the error, and then look at the registry key it was trying to access (should be something related to SNMP). Delete out the (Default) Reg_SZ entry and then try running it again.

[Mister Natural]

Personally I wouldn't run RAS/RAC on a server. I run it on a WinXP system which runs 24/7 next to some servers. That way if there is a problem which requires reboot it isn't a big deal.

[SmackyTheFrog]

XP will only support 5 concurrent inbound connections and this will cause a problem if you have large number of clients.

[Mister Natural]

It doesn't seem to work that way with the RAS.
One of my offices has 100 users and they all get updates from one XP machine running RAS. Never been a problem and never receive any update errors on the client. Been doing this for 4 years now.

[SmackyTheFrog]

No, that is the way it works. Client information and update connections are closed quickly so you can get away with it for a smaller number of clients, but at some point you are going to have a problem with too many clients trying to report their status at the same time in that 5 minute interval and it will be a crapshoot as to what client session silently fails. If a big update comes down that monopolizes the connection for a long period or you have clients updating against a slow connection, you are going to have failures with client-side updates that will resolve themselves after a few hours. If that is acceptable behavior to you then alright, but I really wouldn't recommend doing that and suggest a server OS so you are not fighting that restriction.

[Mister Natural]

In a large enterprise that may not be the best way to do it. But in the situation I mentioned it's worked well for 4 years with never an issue. With the information I've shared folks can decide for themselves the best way to set it up. AMF