[THIN] Re: CSG component installation
- From: pwalley <mythinlist@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 07:52:35 -0500
I am going to assume that you are working with a current version of
CSG. For the most simplified setup, here is a way to go.
You need to keep the STA and the CSG pieces on seperate boxes but
neither have to be dedicated, especially for only 30 users. Place the
STA within the interior of your LAN. This is a box that is critical in
the security and does not need to be risked to compromise.
The CSG and WI can run on the same box. You can actually get away with
running only one SSL certificate and proxy the WI site through CSG.
For simplicity sake, it is easier if the WI/CSG box does not host any
other websites but it is not neccesary.
Does this help?
On 6/23/05, Lee, David (ISD) <David.Lee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm investigating CSG to provide access to our existing MFXP FR2 farm, and
> think I've got a fairly good grasp of how it works from the official Citrix
> documentation (and my head is now spinning with TLA overload....). This
> will be a pilot deployment so we are not expecting more than 20 - 30 users
> total to start with, and whilst needing to follow best practice, we do need
> to keep costs down ;)
>
> I'm just trying to work out the hardware and certificate requirements, and
> decide whether to go with a single or double hop installation. What the
> documentation hasn't clarified is whether I should use dedicated hardware
> for all CSG components, or whether I could install some of the components
> onto existing servers. If double hop requires several dedicated boxes,
> we'll have to go with single hop for this pilot.
>
> Starting with the STA on the secure network, as the service requires IIS,
> could I simply install this as an additional service on an existing WI
> (cough, NFuse), server which services LAN users? If we go for a double hop
> deployment, I see that the SG proxy and WI servers in the second DMZ should
> be separate, but is there any reason why the WI should not be deployed as an
> additional web site on an existing box? And any reason why the SG service
> could not go on an existing DMZ server which doesn't use SSL at present?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> David Lee
>
>
> Systems Engineer
> Strategic Projects and Service Change
> Plymouth City Council
> Civic Centre
> PL1 2AA
>
> Tel: (01752) - 304264
>
> DISCLAIMER
> "The views expressed in this message are personal and must not be considered
> to be the official views of Plymouth City Council."
>
>
> ********************************************************
> This Weeks Sponsor: eg Innovations, Inc.
> Enabling Proactive Infrastructure Triage eG Innovations, Inc. is the leading
> provider of real-time monitoring and proactive triage solutions
> for IT Infrastructures.
> http://www.eginnovations.com/egcitrix.htm
> **********************************************************
> Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
> http://thin.net/links.cfm
> ThinWiki community - Excellent SBC Search Capabilities!
> http://www.thinwiki.com
> ***********************************************************
> For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
> set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
> http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm
>
********************************************************
This Weeks Sponsor: eg Innovations, Inc.
Enabling Proactive Infrastructure Triage eG Innovations, Inc. is the leading
provider of real-time monitoring and proactive triage solutions
for IT Infrastructures.
http://www.eginnovations.com/egcitrix.htm
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
ThinWiki community - Excellent SBC Search Capabilities!
http://www.thinwiki.com
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm
Other related posts:
