[isapros] Re: RDP v6.0 Client Certificate configuration
- From: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 06:36:56 -0700
> [Jim] - selective memory failure, it seems - need a screenshot to jog
> your Alzheimer's? I'll agree that the concept of a "fast" network is
> vague on a good day, but if you don't get "fall back to TCP/IP if HTTP
> fails" form that UI, then maybe we should get your kids to re-educate
> you on English? :-p
Like a screenshot of the TSGateway slides so you can keep changing the subject?
And like I said, which you completely ignored because it serves your ego, both
checkboxes were *originally unchecked* in order to *keep it from doing that*
and *it did it anyway.* You can argue after-the-fact logic all you want, but
the option and communication in the UI is wrong. It would be like having an
RPC/HTTP rule in ISA that had some option inside the protocol definition that
allowed direct RPC/TPC in even if you didn't select it. That's an accurate
analogy, actually.
Here's the bottom line, Poindexter: I'm lucky enough to work with some really
smart people (I reluctantly include you in that list ;) And when it takes us
all several goes at something to test and we all end up scratching our heads
saying "hmmm, that's not the way that's supposed to work" then there's
something to that. So drop it!! :-p
> Because one had a rule with "all authenticated" and the other had "all
> users." That's all...
> [Jim] - not on my testing, it didn't. Completely separate
> environments; neither of which included anonymous web publishing.
Ah, didn't know you had two different results in your testing... I'll leave
that to ya ;)
> > Now, quit mincing words and get that super secret RDP hack for client
> certificate authentication!!!!
> [Jim] - I've already asked about this.
>
Woot! Let me know, please.
t
Other related posts:
