Joe O'Connell
joeo at appoli.com
Thu Apr 23 07:57:28 CDT 2009
John, My understanding is that none of your servers are open to the "outside" world, and the only users are those on your own internal network. At home I have a similar small network that incorporates both wired and wireless PCs. This is also a closed network that is not open to the outside world. At the other end of the spectrum, my company provides hosting services, so all of our servers must be open to the "outside" world. These servers are located in a data center that has been designed for this purpose and that has all of the "normal" security features such as climate control, power backup, multiple fiber connections from multiple vendors, redundant hardware, fire walls, etc. Your setup works for you, so I would not change it just for the sake of change. AFAIK Terminal Services are a standard service of Windows Server 2003. Susan's question concerned giving access to an Access application remotely. In my answer to her, I should have included a caveat that I was assuming that the server sits behind a firewall and is already available to outside users. You have raised another question that I would like to see discussed more fully. My forte is application development, not system or network management which I leave to others, so my knowledge of these areas is limited. Under what configuration is a VPN necessary? What are the advantages/disadvantages of using a VPN? Joe O'Connell -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 8:15 AM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: Re: [AccessD] From a reader -- about migrating Access data to SQLServer on the Web Joe, I run Windows Server 2003 Standard on my servers at the home office. I have a network of two 2003 servers running SQL Server and virtual machines. One other server runs Windows Home Server which is a shell on top of 2003 (small business edition I think). All the other computers on the network run XP - laptops for my wife, my son, a "workstation" for my digital piano and so forth. Very occasionally I have the need to "remote in" from the road. I usually do so via Hamachi to establish a VPN and then use either remote desktop or VNC. My reasons to remote in have to do with running administrative tasks, run SQL Server jobs etc. Is there any reason to setup / learn and move to Terminal Server over a simple remote desktop in my situation? Is terminal server incorporated in 2003 Standard Edition? John W. Colby www.ColbyConsulting.com Joe O'Connell wrote: > Susan, > > > > Access and Citrix work great together. I have an Access 2000 > application that has been running for 10 years on a Server 2000/Citrix > server. It runs with no problems and has supported as many as 40 > simultaneous users. > > > > Citrix was originally developed to add capabilities to Windows NT. > Windows Server 2000 was a huge step forward, but still needed Citrix for > full support of many remote devices. Windows Server 2003 incorporated > most of the functionality of Citrix. The main reason to continue using > Citrix was the ability to publish an application for anonymous users. > Windows Server 2008 now includes the ability to publish an application, > so I am not sure if there is still a need to use Citrix. > > > > I also have 3 servers running Server 2003 that support many Access 2003 > applications. None of these boxes use Citrix. > > > > To answer your questions > > 1. If there are performance issues, data can be migrated to SQL > server, but it is not necessary to support an Access application in a > Terminal Server mode. A normal Access FE/BE configuration works fine. > I usually copy a fresh copy of the front end to a personal folder for > each user when they logon. > > 2. Only a Citrix client needs to be installed on the remote user's > PC. The entire application runs on the server. > > 3. If the server is running Terminal Server 2003, and there is a > requirement to support anonymous users, then Citrix is required. If > support of anonymous users is not required, then there may be no need > for Citrix. If the server is running Terminal Server 2008, then there > should be no need for Citrix. Without Citrix all each remote user needs > to do is configure a Remote Desktop Connection. > > > > Terminal server is a very efficient and easy way to provide remote > access to an Access application. An Access FE puts a very light load on > the server, so a "beefy" box is not required. Tell the reader to go for > it. > > > > Joe O'Connell -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com