On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 18:40 +0100, Paul van der Vlis wrote: > John A. Sullivan III schreef: > > > Our solution was to use x11vnc. It is about the ugliest GUI I have ever > > seen and is a bear to configure but it is blazingly fast and allows > > access to display :0. We then chose xvnc4viewer as the viewer rather > > than Krdc. Krdc evidenced some instability when used with X11vnc. > > I've just tested Vino with Vinagre, this is the Gnome server/client for > VNC. You can connect to :0, looks nice, but it's slow. Yes - similar to Krfb/Krdc > > > If it would be helpful, I can post our procedure and set up to the > > list. > > Yes, I am interested. Do you maybe use the experimental "ncache speedup > feature"? I have never seen a fast VNC connection, even to localhost > it's real slow. We did not use it. All of our desktops are running on a limited number of very large VServer hosts - so we use virtual machine per virtual desktop. Since it is a shared memory environment, we were concerned about inflating memory use. We were not as concerned about performance because most of the traffic is literally inside the VServer host and does not even hit the Gb ethernet connections. > > Why don't you use xtightvncviewer or ssvnc? (x11vnc likes the tightvnc > protocol). We did not use ssvnc because we did not see it in the Lenny repository or in lenny-backports. It also has a very ugly interface even though very powerful. On the other hand, the xtightvncviewer interface was too minimal. xvnc4viewer was a nice balance for our environment - it looked good and gave ready access to options. We also did not have to specify :0 on the target - intuitive for techs but not for end users. Simply entering the target name without the display means fewer help desk calls. <snip> The biggest challenge for us was getting the right combination of the truly overwhelming x11vnc options. The combination we eventually settled on is:
x11vnc -display :50 -shared -accept "popup" -gone "popup" -noxdamage -gui start,simple,tray=setpass There are some caveats here. Because the traffic is in an isolated data center with no users on the local network and because the traffic does not even tough the network in most cases, we did not implement ssl and we did not tunnel it through ssh to avoid the overhead. We also found xvnc4viewer did not support ssl (although we did not try very hard since we did not need it). We did want the users to set a password every time they started it. The noxdamage apparently compensates for a bug and provides much better performance when disabled. The one thing I would like to change is that the user must click on enable remote connections in the password dialog. I would like to default it to that. We tried the unlock and nodeny options but seem to confuse the command line parser. So far, we have been very pleased with the results but we just implemented it a couple of days ago. Hope this helps - John _______________________________________________ X2go-dev mailing list X2go-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/x2go-dev
