[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-513?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17138095#comment-17138095
]
Luke Pickerireo commented on GUACAMOLE-513:
-------------------------------------------
I may be a little late to this party, but feel it's worth a little input.
I've been using Guacamole with the WOL script I created in a 100-user
installation for nearly three years now.
Most machines are alive within 15 sec of the initial magic packet and the
actual login simply occurs once the machine is up. Should it not be up in time
Guacamole retries and the user will get a login on the second attempt. If for
any reason that fails then it's likely another issue.
All machines are set to sleep after 1hr. If the machine is already up it will
get a relatively instant connect, otherwise it takes a few seconds, but either
way it works sufficiently well as-is that there have been no complaints from
any user about this aspect of the operation.
I guess my point is that I'm not certain a defined wait/ping is necessary.
Experience shows me that it's worked well without that - we just needed to send
the magic packet and everything else was taken care of.
Perhaps my one reservation would be that the oldest machine in this group is
probably four years, and many have SSD's, so their on-time is reasonable. A
much older machine might take longer and so would likely require a retry each
time, or perhaps two if really slow. I'm not sure that's a problem per se, at
worst one could simply change the retry message to something more explanatory?
> Wake on LAN integration
> -----------------------
>
> Key: GUACAMOLE-513
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-513
> Project: Guacamole
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Matt Blecha
> Assignee: Nick Couchman
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.2.0
>
>
> I'm beating this horse back to life from the old issue tracker as I do
> believe this is a rather important feature.
> I know it was stated a day or two ago in the old issue tracker that there was
> better justification necessary for this to be considered. Seeing as this
> appears to be supported by both Microsoft in their RD Gateway and in Citrix's
> gateway products since ~2014, there appears to be a fairly reasonable
> justification for such a feature already in the business community, as well
> as demand (seeing as Citrix made a fairly prominent announcement about it.)
>
> ===Begin TL;DR===
>
> We love Guacamole in terms of performance (even when most of our users opted
> to go the VNC route, despite having the RDP option made available to them),
> mobile device operation, ease of use and administration and the pure
> brain-dead simplicity of implementation and integration. (Thanks to the
> developer who wrote that installation script, we were zero to deployed and
> operating in less than 15 minutes, VM server spin-up included!)
> That being said, we may be forced to abandon the whole infrastructure on
> nearly 500 devices (and growing fast) in favor of a solution that is not as
> efficient, yet provides one feature that we dearly need.
> From my research (not as a coder, but serious DevOps experience) it's
> relatively trivial to craft and broadcast a magic packet in Java (A GitHub
> search yields several project with examples averaging about ~75 LOC,
> including sanity checking.) Adding in a sort of "timeout hold-off" should
> yield less than an additional 100 LOC, and user interface adjustments,
> probably another few dozen or so. (Semi-educated guess.) All that would be
> left then is to add an optional MAC address field to the proper table and
> connection form, maybe a checkbox to enable WOL.
> If WOL is simply too hard to code into Guacamole, then a more expansive set
> of classes in the connection API would go a long way towards being able to
> develop an extension. (From what I can see of the API docs, there appears to
> be one call that would allow us to start the WOL process, but there are
> several others necessary, for example; being able to hold off the connection
> timeout while the remote station completes waking up. We do, after all, want
> this to be a seamless process to the end user.)
>
> ===End TL;DR===
>
> It seems to me that there are several reasonable use cases for such a
> feature, even if it is an extension and not a core component, though it seems
> this would probably be easier to merge into core as it would work more
> elegantly with some database integration, which I did not see in the API
> docs. (Admittedly, might not have looked closely enough, and I don't really
> code Java, so I'm not sure what's in that section.)
> I do think this would go a long way in scoring a decent amount of points for
> this project. It seems like there are others out there who support such a
> feature, hacky as it may be in some products.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
