On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 6:01 AM, Herzog wrote:
> I would be more than interested, too!
>
> Mike, is the MIT licensed "poorly implemented" version publicly available?
> Could you publicize it otherwise?
>
No, this is incorrect.
If it were MIT-licensed, yes, we could indeed do as you suggest. The
in context:
http://apache-guacamole-incubating-users.2363388.n4.nabble.com/RemoteFX-Session-Sharing-tp1080p1358.html
Sent from the Apache Guacamole (incubating) - Users mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:52 AM, Jonathan Swift
wrote:
> I'm a little confused. Isn't remotefx a strictly (or mainly) server side
> solution, so that so long as we enable remotefx on the WinServer 2016
> server, all we need is a "plain old" rdp client (eg normal guacamole) and
> it
> should work?
nder + 5 part-time developers, but I'm sure we can help.)
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-guacamole-incubating-users.2363388.n4.nabble.com/RemoteFX-Session-Sharing-tp1080p1277.html
Sent from the Apache Guacamole (incubating) - Users mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
Thanks a lot!
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-guacamole-incubating-users.2363388.n4.nabble.com/RemoteFX-Session-Sharing-tp1080p1090.html
Sent from the Apache Guacamole (incubating) - Users mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Herzog wrote:
> ...
>
> I am trying to integrate Guacamole into my bachelor thesis project (a web
> app of it's own).
>
> ...
>
> I am now trying to implement a session sharing feature. And after stumbling
> across another code of yours, I would try the following fo
mole-incubating-users.2363388.n4.nabble.com/RemoteFX-Session-Sharing-tp1080p1086.html
Sent from the Apache Guacamole (incubating) - Users mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Herzog wrote:
> Would it be sufficient to keep an instance of the initial
> ConfiguredGuacamoleSocket, e.g. in a Map and return a new instance of
> SimpleGuacamoleTunnel(existingConfiguredSocket)?
>
Can you describe what you're trying to do?
Guacamole already sup
Would it be sufficient to keep an instance of the initial
ConfiguredGuacamoleSocket, e.g. in a Map and return a new instance of
SimpleGuacamoleTunnel(existingConfiguredSocket)?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-guacamole-incubating-users.2363388.n4.nabble.com/RemoteFX-Session
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Herzog wrote:
> Hello together,
>
> I have two more questions :-)
>
> 1. Does guacamole support RemoteFX?
>
No, this is not implemented.
> Guacamole seems to use FreeRDP, which does. Yet, there is an open ticket
> which indicated that someone wrote a piece of cod
that drains performance if the
host is not well connected, while RDP does not seem to support multiple
connections.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-guacamole-incubating-users.2363388.n4.nabble.com/RemoteFX-Session-Sharing-tp1080.html
Sent from the Apache Guacamole (incubating) - Users
11 matches
Mail list logo