[THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
- From: "Landin, Mark" <Mark.Landin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 09:19:23 -0500
OK guys we are starting to sound a little condescending, perhaps. Let's
presume for a moment that the business decided their business needs, and
Tony's solution is the best solution.
Tony, we ask for more details about your needs not to try to tear down
or critique your architecture (although if somebody does have a
constructive suggestion, I would expect them to communicate it), but, in
my case at least, I've not been in a situation where your particular
architecture is demanded, so I'm interested in learning what the driving
factors are behind it. It's going to be more of an education for me,
than me trying to educate you!
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andrew Wood
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9:07 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
Are they, for instance, mad?
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Greenberg
Sent: 24 May 2006 12:56
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
Tony,
I fully understand the validity of providing a non-standard
solution based on client needs. Could you explain what type of factors
drive this type of design requirement?
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85262
(602) 432-8649
www.thinclient.net
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tony Lyne
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:30 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
Well in this case it is and really the only solution given their
business drivers behind things.
T.
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Joe Shonk
Sent: Wed 24/05/2006 3:23 p.m.
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
Or prehaps Citrix isn't the best solution in this senario.... As
much as we all love and know citrix, it's not always the ideal solution.
Joe
On 5/23/06, Tony Lyne <Tony.Lyne@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thanks guys,
So really the outcome from this thread is what I expected...
Unfortunately in the ideal world I would have a centralized
datacenter, but in this case it's physically impossible due to a number
of constraints, business and technology wise.
One thing I've been possibly considering is the use of a traffic
shaping appliance like an Exinda optimizer to quantify IMA traffic and
then shaping it to reduce impact on the WAN, and also from there look at
compressing it further.
Tony Lyne
Consultant
Senior Systems Engineer
+64 6 353 7300
<http://www.gen-i.co.nz>
+64 6 356 6800
+64 27 472 0696
tony.lyne@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tony.lyne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
www.gen-i.co.nz <http://www.gen-i.co.nz>
172-174 Broadway Avenue, PO Box 1470,
Palmerston North, New Zealand
"This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact
me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this
communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that
this communication does not designate an information system for the
purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002."
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andrew Wood
Sent: Tuesday, 23 May 2006 8:07 p.m.
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
At pubforum the citix guys mentioned an NHS site that had a
large number of zones (over 10 iirc). The citrix guys thought it would
fall over, but they set it up in the labs and it didn't.
That wasn't a wan per se tho' .... just popped it in for the
large number of zones.
I would have thought besides the high levels IMA traffic going
backwards and forwards, the many policies you'd probably have to put in
place and then manage, the distributed/replicated(?) nature of the
licensing services and access to the datastore, the difficulty in
ensuring standardised deployment patching and application updates across
wan links, possibility of difficulty in managing the user loads in the
event of a disaster, and depending on the nature of the apps scary
problems with home drives, printing and profiles, and increased costs of
adding in bandwidth optimisation technologies it should be absolutely
fine.
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Greenberg
Sent: 23 May 2006 06:21
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
I have to agree this is odd. It is more common to build two
highly fault tolerant data centers and then have the 27 sites access the
data centers. In fact, this would be a significantly better approach for
many reasons! Sorry, I realize you weren't asking for an alternate
design :-)
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85262
(602) 432-8649
www.thinclient.net
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Joe Shonk
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 9:26 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
Odd ball indeed... Most corporations have their WAN links go to
their primary Data Center and to their DR site... So only two sets of
servers are required.
The key will be to keep the number of zones to a minimum.
Joe
On 5/22/06, Tony Lyne <Tony.Lyne@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hey Mark,
Yes it's a bit of an odd ball design request.
The driver behind this particular design is they need a 24x7
uptime and have each site totally autonomous in the case of a WAN
failure. But don't want the hassle of having 27 separate farms to manage
(understandable).
Tony Lyne
Consultant
Senior Systems Engineer
+64 6 353 7300
<http://www.gen-i.co.nz>
+64 6 356 6800
+64 27 472 0696
tony.lyne@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tony.lyne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
www.gen-i.co.nz <http://www.gen-i.co.nz>
172-174 Broadway Avenue, PO Box 1470 ,
Palmerston North, New Zealand
"This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact
me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this
communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that
this communication does not designate an information system for the
purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002."
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Landin, Mark
Sent: Tuesday, 23 May 2006 9:26 a.m.
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
That seems like one ... unorthodox? ... architecture to me. Care
to clarify the details that are leading to this design? (Not saying it's
wrong, just saying I can't think of the real-world problem this solution
is looking for...)
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Tony Lyne
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 4:02 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Citrix farms over a WAN
Guys/Gals,
I've been given a project to scope out a citrix farm
design which consists of 27 sites with 2 load balanced Citrix servers on
each site. The client needs it in this configuration for specific
redundancy reasons (ie WAN redundancy etc...)
Does any one know what the limitations on having a
single farm span across 27 sites (limited bandwidth available as well).
I was planning on specifying a zone for each site, and
disabling load balancing across zones in MPS 4.
Any other pointers would be much appreciated.
Thanks,
Tony Lyne
Consultant
Senior Systems Engineer
+64 6 353 7300
<http://www.gen-i.co.nz>
+64 6 356 6800
+64 27 472 0696
tony.lyne@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tony.lyne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
www.gen-i.co.nz <http://www.gen-i.co.nz>
172-174 Broadway Avenue, PO Box 1470 ,
Palmerston North, New Zealand
"This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact
me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this
communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that
this communication does not designate an information system for the
purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002."
Other related posts:
