You're better of using more and smaller TS VM's per host. Given that SMP is
a lie with todays Nehalem cpus, which are actually NUMA, scheduling a 4vcpu
or larger VM will take more resources from the host. Might not be noticable
if the host isn't loaded but also see the flexibility point that
Have you looked at the TS / RD Gateway feature? It's essentially just
SSL-encrypted RDP proxied through the Terminal Server. The TS licensing
implications are the same as for 'regular' TS desktop users (each user or
remote device requires a TS CAL), but it's dead simple to set up, and you
Yep that’s one item I am checking out now, thanks!
Dave
From: Richard Stovall [mailto:rich...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 3:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Terminal Server or VPN? Now TS on VM Q's too
Have you looked at the TS / RD Gateway feature? It's
.
Of course, the two guys heading up VRX are fellow CTPs! J
Thanks
Carl Webster
Citrix Technology Professional
http://dabcc.com/Webster
From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
Subject: RE: Terminal Server or VPN? Now TS on VM Q's too
Andrew this is actually my thinking
Excellent reference point, thanks Carl!
From: Webster [mailto:carlwebs...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 11:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Terminal Server or VPN? Now TS on VM Q's too
I am not a TS person and have only ever setup 1 pure TS in my career. I would
Andrew this is actually my thinking. Licensing is quite cheap (under $2K for
100 seats), a purchase req got submitted this week - I am fortunate that $2K is
quite small beans in light of the other costs of this move.
My next question is - given an 8CPU 64Gb RAM host system (times two), does it
That beast of a box can support way more than 1 TS VM
Having a single VM gives you far more limited versatility should something
happen to that instance. Having 4, for instance, would be much better, and
give you some flexibility.
We ran 6 TS VMs on a smaller system than yours (4x CPU, 32GB
