Re: Help with Remote Desktop, Terminal Services

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

In news:1165698747.154736.258220@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
mumeishi@xxxxxxxxx <mumeishi@xxxxxxxxx> typed:
Yeah yeah. All the security is a good thing. I work in a secure
environment and grok all that.

I love that you used "grok" correctly in a sentence. It does sound a bit
like an obscure Unix command, too.

However, you see, I have this problem that RWW may not even solve. It
looks like I can't allow the remote desktop option on RWW ("Connect to
Server Dektops") unless the user is a Domain Admin. (Is there a way to
cobble up a Domain Admin user then restrict access to everything
scary? Probably not.)

You'd have to muck around with GPOs. Get at least one WinXP box, and the
users can pick a workstation to log into via RD.

I know I know. They should not log into a server, they should not run
an app on the server, it's all bad. But what am I to do?

Simply put, not do it. It won't work - do you really want your users to run
with scissors anyway?

I'm trying to
get a small group of people running an app from their homes. I've
connected them via VPN, but the network mode of this app is unusably
slow over VPN so what other options exist other than to let them run
the app from the server desktop?

A Windows 2k/2003S box with Terminal Services installed, and enough TS
licenses to support the users. If you don't need a domain, you don't need
SBS at this point.

Or, a bunch of WinXP Pro boxes, joined to the domain properly using the sbs
wizardry....then they RD to the workstations from the RWW page. One at a
time, yes, but they can do it.

Mid- to long-term the server would be
moved into a church building and work would happen in that building
with the app in network mode over the LAN and everyone in proper
security groups. Short-term I need to get them all working remotely
without building out a giant network in my house.

I'm looking at RWW now,
That might work, but you will need some WinXP Pro boxes lying around
for the remote users to access.

Can you elaborate? "some" xp pro boxes? As in more than one?

Since XP allows only one login at a time, then you need as many 'spares' as
you have users who might need to connect simultaneously. Not yours; if
someone logs into it, you can't use it.

I have my
own XP Pro box sitting next to the server, also behind the same
Linksys router. If absolutely necessary I could scrounge another.

If if matters: remote user --(vpn)-->dyndns-->|myhouse|-->cable
modem-->router-->sbs server, xp pro box, & xp pro laptop. I've got
ports 80, 443, 1723 all routed to the sbs server.

Are you suggesting moving the app from the sbs server to the xp pro
box?

Not necessarily, if they can launch the app from the server while logged
into a workstation.

How do I get the users to the app once it's there?

Mapped drive?

Will the xp
pro box need to be a proper resident of the sbs domain? I'm treading
water here.

Yes, it needs to belong to the domain, and it needs to be joined to the
network using the /connectcomputer wizard unless you really feel like doing
a lot of extra work afterwards. Add the users (or Domain Users) to the
Remote Web Workplace Users AD group, and add *that* group to the "Allowed to
connect...." bit in RD on the XP box.



Thanks.

No prob - I suggest you take this conversation over to
microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs if you plan to continue down this path.

On Dec 9, 10:50 am, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<lanwe...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Innews:1165672965.630226.266780@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
bweaveruse...@xxxxxxxxx <bweaveruse...@xxxxxxxxx> typed:

First off, I appreciate the help. Thank you for the answers and for
your patience with an obvious newbie to this Windows server
hodgepodge.

So SBS won't do Terminal Services.Nope. And that's a good thing. A
terminal server shouldn't be a domain
controller, an Exchange server, a DNS server, a file/print server.
It should do nothing but TS. You shouldn't install desktop
applications on an SBS box (or a DC, Exchange server, etc etc etc)
and your users should not be allowed to log into it. In fact, they
can't, unless you've mucked with permissions/policies.

My abject frustration aside, why
would it work before for multiple users and work now for one user,
if
it "cannot" run Terminal Services? (Not meaning to argue with you,
I'm
just confused.)Remote Desktop for administration only.



I'm looking at RWW now,That might work, but you will need some
WinXP Pro boxes lying aroundfor the remote users to access.

and maybe seeing if I can "downgrade" to
something useful. :)

Thanks again.

On Dec 9, 8:01 am, "Vera Noest [MVP]"
<vera.no...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Now you've really turned this whole thread upside down!

A 2003 Small Business Server *cannot* run Terminal Services at all.
Documented here:

828056 - The Terminal Server component is not available in the
Windows Components Wizard in Windows Small Business Server
2003http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=828056

To run Terminal Services for multiple users, you will need a
separate Windows 2003 Server (not SBS). Explained here:

Deploying Windows Server 2003 Terminal Server to Host User Desktops
in a Windows Small Business Server 2003
networkhttp://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sbs/2003/deploy/adstrm
sr.mspx

So it's back to Remote Web Workplace, I guess.
You'd better post your questions in an SBS newsgroup, I think.

_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

bweaveruse...@xxxxxxxxx wrote on 09 dec 2006 in
microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

Okay, here's what I've got: Windows Server 2003 for Small
Business Server, with Service Pack 1. It was purchased with five
CALs.

So, after reading your note, I had a sinking feeling in my gut.
Then after reading more on the web, it sounds like a total mess.
Can someone help me understand what I need? Please?

Let's say there are 20 users that would connect via VPN and
share files, but only a max of five concurrently. Let's further
say 10 of them might need to access the server via Remote
Desktop and run an app, but only three at a time. When I got the
server I thought a CAL was needed for each concurrent user. (And
obviously I thought that meant TS was part of the deal.)

a. Are five CALs okay since only five users will access
concurrently, or do we need 20 CALs?
b. Am I to understand that I need ten TS CALs or only three for
the three concurrent TS users?
c. If I need more CALs and TS CALs, how much do they cost and
how do I get them?

Thanks for the insight.

-bill

Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
Innews:1165589707.034321.61450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
bweaveruse...@xxxxxxxxx <bweaveruse...@xxxxxxxxx> typed:
Vera Noest [MVP] wrote:
Have you checked the EventLog on the server?

Not lately. When I get back to the server I'll check.

I had this working 9 months ago .....
... so this configuration sat idle.

This would mean that the grace period (120 days) has ended.
Do you have a TS Licensing Server installed and activated?
And did you buy and install TS CALs?

Grace period? Not sure. I bought Server 2003 with five client
licenses. Are you saying I need to buy something else for
Terminal Server? Is that true for Remote Desktop (which is
how I think I'd prefer to go)?

PMJI.....another excellent catch by Vera.

Yes, you need to buy TS CALs (and install the TS license
service). These CALs are not the same as Windows Server CALs.
Whether you use the remote desktop client or TSWeb doesn't make
any difference.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Terminal Server Licensing issues on a SBS 2003 Domain
    ... so that means that I do not need any CALS for the ... Chris> Using up the SBS CALS is something that I want to avoid as it will ... Justin> Are you trying to say that if a user logs onto the terminal server ... The reason I want to make it a member server is because some users will need ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services)
  • Re: Terminal Server Licensing issues on a SBS 2003 Domain
    ... so that means that I do not need any CALS for the ... Chris> Using up the SBS CALS is something that I want to avoid as it will ... Justin> Are you trying to say that if a user logs onto the terminal server ... The reason I want to make it a member server is because some users will need ...
    (microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz)
  • Re: SBS2003 - Transition Pack
    ... If you were under your current purchased CALs, ... If it still says it's SBS, ... Once the transition is complete, ... Server 2003 Standard Edition and Exchange Server 2003 Standard. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Licence reset in SBS 2003
    ... I understand that the CALs often disappear on SBS ... Microsoft CSS Online Newsgroup Support ... >> We are maintenaing few SBS 2003 server and sometime we lose all our ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • help on SBS config and licensing
    ... server - I don't know how to classify this but we also have an MS ... Access DB in the SBS that at most 3 users access at one time so I'm ... Use the same sqlserver 2K as backend for a client/server app. ...
    (microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000)