Citrix

-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 12:28 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Remote Location AD Question

You must not have any overseas or other high-latency links to your
offices.

One example will demonstrate what I mean:

Using Windows Explorer to browse the US file server from either our AU
(40 people) or UK (20 people) offices, there are some directories -
fairly large one, but under 1k files in the directory - that take as
much as 30 minutes to paint the screen.

Yes, we could mitigate some of that with a Riverbed or other caching
appliance, but those cost money too. We've chosen to mitigate it with
a Win2k TS server - we're hesitant about going to Win2k3 because of
cost for the CALs. I'll probably use our new SonicWal SSL VPN
appliance to mitigate some of this, by exporting shares over a web
interface - that should be much quicker to browse.

Requiring all browsing to go through the US office would be insane,
and siting a DC/GC in each office is pretty much required, along with
an Exchange and file server.

Kurt


On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 8:53 AM, David Mazzaccaro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Everything goes over the wire, including internet access.  There are
no
> servers at the remote locations.
>
> As for IP addresses:
> Office1 = 192.168.50.0/24
> Office2 = 192.168.51.0/24
> Office3 = 192.168.53.0/24
> Etc.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 11:46 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Remote Location AD Question
>
> What do you guys use for IP assignment?  We have 3 remote offices,
each
> with less than 15 users, that I'd love to get to a point of not having
a
> DC there.  Do you have member server in place for files, etc?  Or do
you
> have everything going over the wire to your central site?
>
>
> Joe Heaton
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Peck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 9:32 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Remote Location AD Question
>
> You definitely want those workstations joined to the domain.  GPO for
> management, Anti-virus updates, patch management, reporting/inventory
of
> the systems, remoting in for troubleshooting etc.  Logon traffic for
50
> workstations across a t1 is negligible as long as latency is low.
>
> On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 9:14 AM, David Mazzaccaro
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> We don't use RDP, but rather ICA (Citrix) and it works great - all
>> their apps are available.
>> As for locking down - we use GPOs rather than locking them down
>> individually.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: N Parr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 9:53 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: RE: Remote Location AD Question
>>
>> Thanks, I guess I won't worry about it for now.  It's just a shipping
>> warehouse at the moment and I'll be ok as long as they don't decide
to
>
>> put office staff at the location.
>> ________________________________
>> From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 8:37 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: RE: Remote Location AD Question
>>
>> I have a remote location w/ 30 workstations and IP phones, no remote
>> DC, connected over a MPLS VPN T1 circuit.
>>
>> Works great! Less filling!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: N Parr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 9:23 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Remote Location AD Question
>>
>>
>>
>> How many member workstations would you put at a remote location
>> connected with a Site to Site VPN over a T-1 without a local DC?
Only
>
>> other traffic on the line will be an IP phone, random print jobs and
>> RDP sessions from remote workstations.  What I'm thinking is since
>> these remote workstations will run everything over their RDP sessions
>> I shouldn't even bother making them domain members.  Just lock them
> down and only allow them access to RDP.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Niles
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Reply via email to