[isapros] Re: RDP v6.0 Client Certificate configuration
- From: "Thomas W Shinder" <tshinder@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:46:36 -0500
At least you didn't ask him how to kick the perms.
Thomas W Shinder, M.D.
Site: www.isaserver.org
Blog: http://blogs.isaserver.org/shinder/
Book: http://tinyurl.com/3xqb7
MVP -- Microsoft Firewalls (ISA)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thor
> (Hammer of God)
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 11:45 AM
> To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isapros] Re: RDP v6.0 Client Certificate configuration
>
> I would like to think that Jim blogged that partly, if not entirely,
> because of my incessant whining regarding the matter. :)
>
> t
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-
> > bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerald G. Young
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 8:13 AM
> > To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [isapros] Re: RDP v6.0 Client Certificate configuration
> >
> > Kewl... yeah... testing internally can be problematic
> because internal
> > clients usually will have RPC connectivity to the Exchange boxes.
> >
> > For those who are not aware, the Registry settings are below.
> >
> > Path
> > Outlook 2003
> >
> HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\11.0\Outlook\RPC
> > Outlook 2007
> >
> HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\12.0\Outlook\RPC
> >
> > Name DisableRpcTcpFallback
> > Type DWORD
> > Value 1
> >
> > This setting normally doesn't exist so will need to be created.
> >
> > Also... I just stumbled across the following, dated 8/13/07:
> >
> >
> http://blogs.technet.com/isablog/archive/2007/08/13/testing-rpc-over-
> > htt
> > p-through-isa-server-2006-part-2-test-tools-and-strategies.aspx
> >
> > Did Jim point you to this blog? :)
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-
> > bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > On Behalf Of Thor (Hammer of God)
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 10:58 AM
> > To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [isapros] Re: RDP v6.0 Client Certificate configuration
> >
> > Yes, but only after Jim let me know that... Now that I know the
> > behavior
> > of Outlook, it's cool, it is just that at the time I was testing
> > RPC/HTTP internally, and it was working but only because OL was
> > reverting back to TCP even though I never asked it to. Not knowing
> its
> > behavior, it lead me to troubleshoot something other than
> the RPCProxy
> > ;0-
> >
> > t
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-
> > > bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerald G. Young
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 7:00 AM
> > > To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [isapros] Re: RDP v6.0 Client Certificate configuration
> > >
> > > Tim,
> > >
> > > Are you aware of the Registry entry(ies) that can be used
> to prevent
> > > falling back to TCP if HTTP does not work?
> > >
> > > Jerry
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-
> > > bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > On Behalf Of Thor (Hammer of God)
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 9:58 AM
> > > To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [isapros] Re: RDP v6.0 Client Certificate configuration
> > >
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > > > [Jim] - Finally; I've moved up to "reluctantly smart"!
> :-p Yep -
> I
> > > was
> > > > scratching my head right alongside you until I realized that I'd
> > let
> > > > myself be drawn into your interpretation of some (surprisingly
> > clear
> > > > for MS) UI text. When I went back and actually read it, the
> > meaning
> > > > was clear (if only in retrospect). I'll grant you that
> it doesn't
> > > pop
> > > > up a four-paragraph warning with a pissed off paperclip warning
> the
> > > > user that "If I can't reach Exchange using HTTP, I'll
> fall back to
> > > TCP;
> > > > are you ok with that?, followed by "Are you sure?",
> then "are you
> > > > really, really sure?"...
> > >
> > > It's amazing you've stayed married this long... Are you actually
> > > trying
> > > to use the "I'm not taking about what happens if do you
> do or don't
> > > check the checkbox, but only what the checkbox text says"
> as support
> > > for
> > > your argument? I understand the "use TCP if HTTP fails" logic
> > (though
> > > they still could have worded it better. I'm saying that even when
> > you
> > > *don't* check that, it *does it* anyway. You know, after
> all this,
> I
> > > think I will indeed follow your advice and talk to my
> kids about it.
> > > Even the 6 year old listens ;)))))
> > >
> > > t
> > >
> > >
> > > =================================
> > >
> > > This email message is intended for the use of the person
> to whom it
> > has
> > > been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or
> > legally
> > > protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received
> > this
> > > message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or
> > > otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the
> > sender
> > > immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this
> message and
> > > any attachments. NTT America makes no warranty that this email is
> > error
> > > or virus free. Thank you.
> >
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
