[THIN] Re: CSG and WI 2.0
- From: "Robert Coffman - Info From Data Corporation" <bcoffman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 08:18:51 -0400
MessageCaution with VMWare Workstation 4.0 - the 1 GB limit applies to the
sum total of _all_ running guests. If you have 4 guests, each with 256MB,
and try to launch a 5th, no go.
No such limit in ESX (and possibly GSX, although I have no experience with
it.) In fact, I believe ESX will allow you to overcommit physical RAM,
under the assumption that you won't use it all in a guest OS anyway.
- Bob Coffman
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Jarred Hogan
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 9:48 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CSG and WI 2.0
Just a thought....We have been testing VMware for this situation, manly
for redundancy and we cant fault it...VMware Workstation (Damn cheap too) is
all you need and by law you can run up to 8 virtual MS Servers on the one
MS Server license. Only draw back with VMware Workstation is you can only
use 1gig of RAM per virtual PC and they don't run as a service like VMware
Server. The Virtual PC can be saved and then run on a totally different PC
(hardware changed) so long as VMware is installed on it.
Jarred
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tony Lyne
Sent: Friday, 12 September 2003 8:46 a.m.
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CSG and WI 2.0
On top of that you could also use local IPsec policies as a packet filter
and only allow ports 443 in onto your web server.
Its not what IPsec was initially designed for but it works well as a
second level of defence to your firewall.
Tony Lyne
Senior Systems Engineer
Computerland Central
P O Box 1470
PALMERSTON NORTH
Telephone (+64) 06 3537300
Facsimile (+64) 06 3566800
Mobile (+64) 0274 720696
E-mail Tony.Lyne@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Internet http://www.computerland.co.nz
CAUTION: This e-mail message and accompanying data may contain information
that is confidential and subject to privilege. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this message or data is prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify me immediately and delete all material
pertaining to this e-mail. Thank you.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mack, Rick [mailto:RMack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, 11 September 2003 10:50 p.m.
To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: [THIN] Re: CSG and WI 2.0
HI,
CSG and WI on the same box works fine.
Set up your STA. Install IIS on a machine in your DMZ. If you're crazy (or
desperate enough) you can even have the STA running on the same machine.
Make sure you have appropriate service pack levels etc (SP3 or later if
running SG on win2k).
Install the cert using IIS/WI running SSL, then flip back to port 80 only.
To make absolutuely certain, change the IIS port to 442 since I have had a
couple of instances where IIS stayed with a listener on port 443, stuffing
up SG.
Now install and configure SG, use the cert installed for IIS, and set SG
to talk to WI on another machine, but specify the IP address/FQDN of the
local machine. For some reason specifying the localhost has often failed for
me.
Then you can set an IIS filter to make sure that nothing from outside
connects directly to IIS on port 80, or just make sure your firewall is set
up to allow incoming connections to SG only on port 443.
regards,
Rick
Ulrich Mack
rmack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Volante Systems
18 Heussler Terrace, Milton 4064
Queensland Australia
tel +61 7 32467704
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Duckworth [mailto:KDuckworth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, 11 September 2003 4:12 AM
To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: [THIN] Re: CSG and WI 2.0
Hmmm....I am in the process of doing the same thing as Stuart, so I
would like to know the answer on this from others as well.
When talking to a Citrix Engineer @ Citrix, he said that NFuse 1.7 and
below you couldn't put WI and CSG on the same box. But, with the advent of
2.0, you can.
I don't know if that was just a sales pitch or the truth.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart Hall [mailto:SHall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 2:10 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] CSG and WI 2.0
I've already rolled out the older versions CSG and Nfuse on the same
box without a hitch.
Now we're upgrading to CSG and WI 2.0 for a secondary site. The
previous versions required some hacking of IIS to allow it to share port 443
between the two different apps (IIS and CSG) and multiple IP's on the
server. I'm going through the 2.0 documentation (my first install broke, so
I'm reinstalling and this time reading the docs :-P ) and there is no
mention of either of these requirements.
The single hop DMZ solution Citrix provides shows CSG and WI on the
same box. I tried this and it didn't work for me. Given that Citrix docs
are pretty pathetic does anyone know if there are better docs out there
and/or what steps I may be missing?
Thanks in advance,
Stuart
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be
subject
to legal professional privilege. It is intended solely for the addressee.
If you receive this e-mail by mistake please promptly inform us by reply
e-mail and then delete the e-mail and destroy any printed copy. You must
not disclose or use in any way the information in the e-mail. There is no
warranty that this email or any attachment or message is error or virus
free. It may be a private
communication, and if so, does not represent the views of Volante group
Limited.
Other related posts:
