[isapros] Re: RDP v6.0 Client Certificate configuration

  • From: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 20:47:36 -0700

[beats head against wall]

> Bottom line is that "it don't work as advertised."  That being said,
> I'm ok working within the limitations of the implementation, but that's
> what it is: a limitation, so jump off that high horse, cowboy! :)
> 
> [Jim] - quicherbitchin, whiny-boy.  You don't like the way the docs
> read, feel free to post to isadocs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx  It's your direct
> line to the ISA doc team.  Along that same train, had you actually
> "read" the UI text when you configured OL to use HTTP, you'd have seen
> the phrase "on fast networks, connect using HTTP first, then connect
> using TCP/IP".  I wonder what they meant by that? :-p

Oh, I see.  It's my fault that your people don't know how to properly document 
their own product? And it's just like you to divert the issue by bringing up 
something completely different...  For the record, that "then connect" language 
in OL is a sub-UI under "Connect to Microsoft Exchange using HTTP." Not "Maybe 
connect using HTTP if I feel like it" or "We'll choose whatever connection 
method we want randomly," but "Connect using HTTP."  And of course I read it 
first-- I just didn't understand WTF they were talking about when they said 
"HTTP then TCP/IP" as if HTTP was some other transport protocol -it's not.  
It's still over "TCP."  What it should say is "After we arbitrarily determine 
what we think a fast or slow network is, and you can't connect via RPC/HTTP for 
some reason, then we'll fall back on RPC/TCP."  But it doesn't say that.  Of 
course, even if you leave BOTH those unchecked, surprise surprise surprise, it 
reverts anyway!  Golly!  That's not because I don't read, it's because English 
is a second (or third) language to the people writing your software and they 
don't know how to clearly convey ideas.

> [Jim] - kewl enuf.  I still want to sort out why one environment has to
> "force auth" and another doesn’t.  This'll take some tracing.

Because one had a rule with "all authenticated" and the other had "all users."  
That's all... 

Now, quit mincing words and get that super secret RDP hack for client 
certificate authentication!!!!

t

Other related posts: