Fault tolerant ts cluster?

[Guest Paul Jensen]

I know that 2003 doesn't provide fault tolerance for terminal server

services, but does 2008 address this?

 

Is there any other way to provide high availability for terminal services?

 

It's not load balancing I'm looking for it's high availability.

 

Thanks!

[Guest Bart Van Vugt]

RE: Fault tolerant ts cluster?

 

In Windows Server 2008 a new feature called Terminal Services Session Broker

is available. This feature can be used for high availability. On the MS site

you'll find this info about the session broker :

It provides a simpler alternative than Microsoft Network Load Balancing for

Terminal Services. While not limited to a specific number of servers, the

feature provides significant value to farms of two to five servers. With TS

Session Broker, new sessions are distributed to the least-loaded server

within the farm—optimizing performance—and users can reconnect to an existing

session without having to know specific information about the server where

the session was established. IT managers can use the feature to map the

Internet Protocol (IP) address of each terminal server to a single Domain

Name System (DNS) entry. This configuration can also provide fault tolerance;

if one of the farm servers is unavailable, the user will connect to the next

least-loaded server in the farm.

 

 

"Paul Jensen" wrote:

> I know that 2003 doesn't provide fault tolerance for terminal server

> services, but does 2008 address this?

>

> Is there any other way to provide high availability for terminal services?

>

> It's not load balancing I'm looking for it's high availability.

>

> Thanks!

>

[Guest paul.a.jensen@gmail.com]

Re: Fault tolerant ts cluster?

 

On Dec 21, 2:45 am, Bart Van Vugt

<BartVanV...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> In Windows Server 2008 a new feature called Terminal Services Session Broker

> is available. This feature can be used for high availability. On the MS site

> you'll find this info about the session broker :

> It provides a simpler alternative than Microsoft Network Load Balancing for

> Terminal Services. While not limited to a specific number of servers, the

> feature provides significant value to farms of two to five servers. With TS

> Session Broker, new sessions are distributed to the least-loaded server

> within the farm--optimizing performance--and users can reconnect to an existing

> session without having to know specific information about the server where

> the session was established. IT managers can use the feature to map the

I did read that, but it sounds more like it will just reconnect a user

to the same ts server if they loose a connections. Would it recognize

that one ts server is dead and re-direct all users to the other ts

server? Why doesn't MS make terminal services cluster aware like SQL

server?

 

Citrix has a full TS cluster solution, why doesn't MS?

 

 

 

 

> Internet Protocol (IP) address of each terminal server to a single Domain

> Name System (DNS) entry. This configuration can also provide fault tolerance;

> if one of the farm servers is unavailable, the user will connect to the next

> least-loaded server in the farm.

>

> "Paul Jensen" wrote:

> > I know that 2003 doesn't provide fault tolerance for terminal server

> > services, but does 2008 address this?

>

> > Is there any other way to provide high availability for terminal services?

>

> > It's not load balancing I'm looking for it's high availability.

>

> > Thanks!

[Guest Bart Van Vugt]

Re: Fault tolerant ts cluster?

 

If one server is dead all new connections will go to the other server. The

other option is buy Citrix.

 

"paul.a.jensen@gmail.com" wrote:

> On Dec 21, 2:45 am, Bart Van Vugt

> <BartVanV...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> > In Windows Server 2008 a new feature called Terminal Services Session Broker

> > is available. This feature can be used for high availability. On the MS site

> > you'll find this info about the session broker :

> > It provides a simpler alternative than Microsoft Network Load Balancing for

> > Terminal Services. While not limited to a specific number of servers, the

> > feature provides significant value to farms of two to five servers. With TS

> > Session Broker, new sessions are distributed to the least-loaded server

> > within the farm--optimizing performance--and users can reconnect to an existing

> > session without having to know specific information about the server where

> > the session was established. IT managers can use the feature to map the

> I did read that, but it sounds more like it will just reconnect a user

> to the same ts server if they loose a connections. Would it recognize

> that one ts server is dead and re-direct all users to the other ts

> server? Why doesn't MS make terminal services cluster aware like SQL

> server?

>

> Citrix has a full TS cluster solution, why doesn't MS?

>

>

>

>

>

> > Internet Protocol (IP) address of each terminal server to a single Domain

> > Name System (DNS) entry. This configuration can also provide fault tolerance;

> > if one of the farm servers is unavailable, the user will connect to the next

> > least-loaded server in the farm.

> >

> > "Paul Jensen" wrote:

> > > I know that 2003 doesn't provide fault tolerance for terminal server

> > > services, but does 2008 address this?

> >

> > > Is there any other way to provide high availability for terminal services?

> >

> > > It's not load balancing I'm looking for it's high availability.

> >

> > > Thanks!

>

>