[THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
- From: "Andrew Wood" <andrew.wood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:12:44 +0100
Just out of interest - is it a single app -- or couple of apps - to a db
backend, or is it more of a desktop environment?
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Tony Lyne
Sent: 24 May 2006 21:01
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
Sorry guys I cant really give out any more information because of the nature
of the project.
But all I can say is thay my inital WAN concerns are now addressed with this
kind of farm design. I found out last night they are all 2M links with a
100M wan link at the core datacenter, % utilization of the WAN looks very
low. Traffic is also shaped which will help.
I would have to admit though, doing this with Metaframe XP 1.0 would have
been near impossible, but when Citrix changed the way Zones can communicate
over multiple subnets (ie disabling LB across zones) its now a viable
option, Also using policies to control LB behavior within those zones is a
real bonus.
T.
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Selinger, Stephen
Sent: Thu 25/05/2006 3:24 a.m.
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
My biggest question about this design is "Where is the application data". Is
the data for these applications be replicated between all 27 of these sites.
I would get that question answered first then design Citrix around that.
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Andrew Wood
Sent: May 24, 2006 8:07 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Citrix farms over a WAN
Are they, for instance, mad?
This communication is intended for the use of the recipient to which it is
addressed, and may contain confidential, personal and or privileged
information. Please contact us immediately if you are not the intended
recipient. Do not copy, distribute or take action relying on it. Any
communication received in error, or subsequent reply, should be deleted or
destroyed.
Other related posts:
