[THIN] FW: slow session/latency?

  • From: Angela <angela_smith9@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 15:12:00 +1000

Sorry wrong ping details sent..

Ping xxxxxxxx [xxx.x.x,xxx] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from xxx.x.x,xxx: bytes=32 time=157ms TTL=122
Reply from xxx.x.x,xxx: bytes=32 time=157ms TTL=122
Reply from xxx.x.x,xxx: bytes=32 time=157ms TTL=122
Reply from xxx.x.x,xxx: bytes=32 time=157ms TTL=122

Ping statistics for xxx.x.x,xxx:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 157ms, Maximum = 157s, Average = 157ms

From: angela_smith9@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: slow session/latency?
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 14:54:59 +1000





Hi

Running a 6 x Server XenApp 6.5 farm. I've got users connecting in from India
and they are complaining about performance being slow. Slow saving documents
and slow screen refreshes. The Citrix Server and Windows File Server are in
our main site in Australia so there is no WAN traversing.. My gut feel is that
its simply a latency issue but was hoping for some suggestions for
troubleshooting.. Here is the ping response from India client to Citrix
Server:

Pinging xxxxxxxx [xxx.x.x,xxx] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from xxx.x.x,xxx: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=122
Reply from xxx.x.x,xxx: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=122
Reply from xxx.x.x,xxx: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=122
Reply from xxx.x.x,xxx: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=122

Ping statistics for xxx.x.x,xxx:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 157ms, Maximum = 157s, Average = 157ms

I've deleted the users profile and they are running the latest ICA Client..
Any other ideas for troublshooting?


Thanks
Ang

From: drooney57@xxxxxxxxx
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: securing a terminal
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 20:19:00 -0700

Jan, Greg Thanks for the reply.~Doug From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jan
Sent: Friday, April 03, 2015 2:57 PM
To: thin-list
Subject: [THIN] Re: securing a terminal Use a multi-layered approach. I use a
Skydog Router. It is inexpensive and very powerful in what it can do.Safe Eyes
software is very effective.OpenDNS is pretty good. I'm sure you know, nothing
will ever be 100%. So let them know in no uncertain terms, up front, that you
WILL be monitoring what they are doing, and that they should NOT have any
expectation of privacy when using anything on the internet. That way there are
no misunderstandings. On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Doug Rooney
<drooney57@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:GreetingsWe do Emergency Foster care and are for
the first time getting an older child that needs access to the Internet for
school.I have let the other kids just get on line and didn’t worry, but now we
are getting an 11 year old and I need to figure outhow to lock it so she cannot
go to places she is not allowed, in the past, with my own children I used ‘Net
Nanny’.Any ideas on what is current and works? Thank all Cheers ~Dr.Doug

Other related posts: