vpn or terminal server

  • Thread starter Thread starter RS
  • Start date Start date
R

RS

I want to allow clients to access an application database from home. The
software can be installed locally on the home PC, but the data will be here
in the office. I was thinking just to use MS VPN, then mapping the data
drive. Is there some benefit to using Terminal Services? What do you
suggest? They will not be running any actual applications on the server.

Thanks in advance.
 
RS said:
I want to allow clients to access an application database from home.
The software can be installed locally on the home PC, but the data
will be here in the office. I was thinking just to use MS VPN, then
mapping the data drive. Is there some benefit to using Terminal
Services? What do you suggest? They will not be running any actual
applications on the server.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

If you're using a database app, then TS will likely be a lot better for you.
Performance across VPN will probably not be very good and if you lose the
connection, you may end up with corrupt data. With TS, you're just getting
screen shots, really...will likely work a lot more reliably. VPN is nice but
has its limitations.
 
if the data is in the remote network, you should use ts over vpn.

--
For more and other information, go to http://www.ChicagoTech.net


Don't send e-mail or reply to me except you need consulting services.
Posting on MS newsgroup will benefit all readers and you may get more help.


Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE

Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN, Anti-Virus, Tips & Troubleshooting on
http://www.ChicagoTech.net
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties.
 
But why would I want to bother downloading screenshots with TS? Seems like
the VPN would make more sense.
 
RS said:
But why would I want to bother downloading screenshots with TS? Seems like
the VPN would make more sense.
Click to expand...

Depends on the app - if its proper client server based (i.e. the app is on
the client pc, and the db is SQL server etc) then you might be fine, but if
the database is based on MS Access for instance, then youll have trouble, as
the connection wont be up to the job. We've had this trouble where our
customers' IT suppliers set this up without consulting us and then whinge
when their data gets screwed. The way a lot of "desktop" database engines
work means that a fair chunk of the db file is read into memory when the app
is started - think how long it would take to copy a 200Mb file down an ADSL
link, and you can imagine how the client application will respond (if at
all).

Like I say, we are moving our app to SQL Server and we've tested it across a
VPN via ADSL and it's fine, so it really depends... I'd contact the
application supplier for their recommendation.
James
 
RS said:
But why would I want to bother downloading screenshots with TS? Seems
like
the VPN would make more sense.
Click to expand...


Terminal Server is much more reliable over slow connections and can be
configured in such a way that if a connection is lost the actual session is
not. So when a user reconnects they are back into their original session
with no lost data.

I've tried both and would recommend TS every time. IMO, VPN is fine for the
occasional file copy or access but just isn't up to the task of running a DB
app over slower links.
 
Robert R Kircher said:
Terminal Server is much more reliable over slow connections and can be
configured in such a way that if a connection is lost the actual session is
not. So when a user reconnects they are back into their original session
with no lost data.

I've tried both and would recommend TS every time. IMO, VPN is fine for the
occasional file copy or access but just isn't up to the task of running a DB
app over slower links.
Click to expand...

In addition to Rob's advice, i'd also point out that using TS makes admin a
damn site easier. When a user has a problem you simply connect in and watch
what they do, taking over if necessary. You can give everyone the same
desktop, limiting what they can access (break) and if you use 2000 or above
for the server, it'll map printers back to the client pc in their session so
they can even print locally.
Yes, you can use VNC/Remote Assistance/Whatever to support the user when
something goes wrong on their client PC, but what if they break that and you
can't get in...?
James
 
James said:
In addition to Rob's advice, i'd also point out that using TS makes admin
a
damn site easier. When a user has a problem you simply connect in and
watch
what they do, taking over if necessary. You can give everyone the same
desktop, limiting what they can access (break) and if you use 2000 or
above
for the server, it'll map printers back to the client pc in their session
so
they can even print locally.
Yes, you can use VNC/Remote Assistance/Whatever to support the user when
something goes wrong on their client PC, but what if they break that and
you
can't get in...?
James
Click to expand...


I agree whole heartedly here!!! I spent 45 minutes on the phone this
morning with a client who uses VPN and I'd say 20 min of that time was
related to is your VPN actually connected . The rest of the time had to do
with Outlook not being able to open emails and then giving a file not found
error. As you may have guessed the PST file is on the remote server so
every time the VPN dropped so did outlook. Anyway, I'll be making a house
call tomorrow to try and chase down the real problem.

I have tried many times to get this client to convert to a Terminal Server
but they won't foot the bill for a "server." Of course if they added up all
the money spent on supporting the VPN solution they could have bought a
server and then some.

On the other hand, tomorrow I'm installing a Terminal Server for a client
who is fed up with not being able to work from remote locations.

One last thing to add, TS works surprisingly well over a 56k connection.
Try to run a database app over 56k that isn't written to be used over a slow
connection. Its imposable.
 
Robert said:
I agree whole heartedly here!!! I spent 45 minutes on the phone this
morning with a client who uses VPN and I'd say 20 min of that time was
related to is your VPN actually connected . The rest of the time had
to do with Outlook not being able to open emails and then giving a
file not found error. As you may have guessed the PST file is on the
remote server so every time the VPN dropped so did outlook. Anyway,
I'll be making a house call tomorrow to try and chase down the real
problem.
Click to expand...

OT, but note that MS doesn't support accessing PST files over a network link
of any kind - just locally stored files. If you have the option to get them
to use Exchange, go for it. PST files are evil, IMO.
I have tried many times to get this client to convert to a Terminal
Server but they won't foot the bill for a "server." Of course if
they added up all the money spent on supporting the VPN solution they
could have bought a server and then some.
Click to expand...

Show them the numbers!
On the other hand, tomorrow I'm installing a Terminal Server for a
client who is fed up with not being able to work from remote
locations.

One last thing to add, TS works surprisingly well over a 56k
connection. Try to run a database app over 56k that isn't written to
be used over a slow connection. Its imposable.
Click to expand...

Yep. I'm a big fan of TS for nearly anything besides syncing Outlook offline
data to Exchange, and the occasional small file transfer.
 
"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
OT, but note that MS doesn't support accessing PST files over a network
link
of any kind - just locally stored files. If you have the option to get
them
to use Exchange, go for it. PST files are evil, IMO.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree, but as with the TS I can't get them to spring for Exchange
even thought the server we put in was sized to handle it.

Show them the numbers!
Click to expand...

Been there done that. Some clients are just hard headed and seem to want to
more by paying little bits at a time then paying less in one big bill. Trip
over a dollar to save a dime so to speak.
 
Robert R Kircher, Jr. wrote:
Absolutely agree, but as with the TS I can't get them to spring for
Exchange even thought the server we put in was sized to handle it.
Click to expand...

OK, so let them see what happens when their users can't access their mail or
their PST files get corrupted.
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=297019
Been there done that. Some clients are just hard headed and seem to
want to more by paying little bits at a time then paying less in one
big bill. Trip over a dollar to save a dime so to speak.
Click to expand...

Yep. Which is why I generally avoid working with clients who can't recognize
plain sense when it punches them in the nose. It'll come back to haunt me if
I do....I have some basic standards that make things work right, and cost
the clients less in the loong run, and if clients can't meet the minimum, I
don't want to work with them. :-)
 
"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
Robert R Kircher, Jr. wrote:


OK, so let them see what happens when their users can't access their mail
or
their PST files get corrupted.
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=297019


Yep. Which is why I generally avoid working with clients who can't
recognize
plain sense when it punches them in the nose. It'll come back to haunt me
if
I do....I have some basic standards that make things work right, and cost
the clients less in the loong run, and if clients can't meet the minimum,
I
don't want to work with them. :-)
Click to expand...


Well I do very little work for these folks for this very reason. As a mater
of fact, I just turned down some work from them on expanding their network.
They were insistent on going wireless for a second floor expansion that
clearly called for a wired solution. They rolled it out on their own. I've
been getting calls from individual users complaining about intermittent
connectivity problems. And again the cost per computer for wireless is more
then having me just running the wired drops. Some people never learn.
 
Robert said:
"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
Robert R Kircher, Jr. wrote:


OK, so let them see what happens when their users can't access their
mail or
their PST files get corrupted.
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=297019


Yep. Which is why I generally avoid working with clients who can't
recognize
plain sense when it punches them in the nose. It'll come back to
haunt me if
I do....I have some basic standards that make things work right, and
cost the clients less in the loong run, and if clients can't meet
the minimum, I
don't want to work with them. :-)
Click to expand...


Well I do very little work for these folks for this very reason. As
a mater of fact, I just turned down some work from them on expanding
their network. They were insistent on going wireless for a second
floor expansion that clearly called for a wired solution. They
rolled it out on their own. I've been getting calls from individual
users complaining about intermittent connectivity problems. And
again the cost per computer for wireless is more then having me just
running the wired drops. Some people never learn.
Click to expand...

Yep!
 
Back
Top