Citrix Licencing 2

[pinkpanther56]

We have had a couple of companies in to quote for a citrix installation and i'm getting a bit confused by all the options i wonder if someone could clear up a couple of licensing issues.

Out initial setup will just be approx 30 thin clients on the LAN and 10-15 external connections for home workers.

We've been told we need a Citrix Secure Gateway as just a Cisco PIX isn't upto the job. Is this the case?

We have a Windows 2003 Active Directory domain, with our current setup what licences do we need, i understand we need a TS licence for each connection and a Citrix CAL is this correct?

With some users connecting from home do we need an 'External connector licence' as well? (this is all getting very expensive there seems to be a different licence for every feature)

Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks.

 

[pgaliardo]

I know you will need at least 45 Microsoft Terminal Server Cals as well as the Citrix Cals. I'm not sure about the external connector CAL. Access Gateway is probably the preferred method, but not required. I can connect from my home without the use of the Citrix Access Gateway.

 

[ascotta]

I would say that I have never heard of External COnnector Licenses, unless they are needed for Gateway.

ANyways

45 TS Cals, 45 Citrix Cals, PIX I would be wanting to know why that couldn't handle 15 external traffic users?

say 50K per user x 15 750K of bandwidth useage ? Although tis will be dependant on what will be going up and down that link at the same time.

[blue] A perspective from the other side!![/blue]

Cheers
Scott

 

[pinkpanther56]

We'll be having a Citrix secure gateway as part of the setup i was starting to wonder if the 'External Connector Licenses' were for that on top of the Citrix licence (so i was getting the spiraling cost fear). I think regarding the PIX that they're saying the Citrix gateway box is more flexible than a PIX so i'm assuming that it can act as a firewall as well (is that the case?).

Cheers.

 

[Dublin73]

The Access Gateway box is really nice, but probably not necessary with only 15 to 20 external users if you already have a PIX. Regarding licenses...

For each connecting user you will need a Microsoft TS CAL. This will be either a "User" or "Device" CAL. A Microsoft Terminal Server (which Citrix runs on) can accept either per user TS CALs or per device, but not both.

For each Citrix user you require 1 connection license, to connect to the Citrix Presentation servers.

If you were to use the Citrix Access Gateway, you would also need 1 connection license for this, for each active connection. In other words, a user working from home, accessing Citrix in your office would needs 3 licenses if you had a Citrix gateway in place. One Microsoft TS CAL, one Citrix Presentation server connection license and one Citrix Access Gateway license.

The PIX firewalls are the business! If I were you, I'd consider using the free Cisco PIX VPN client software on your remote users' PCs. I have done this in the past and it works nicely.

On the remote PCs, install your Citrix client and your Cisco PIX VPN client. Once you've made the VPN connection, you launch your Citrix client a if you were sitting in the office.

This is a simple solution for just a small number of users. I'd check out how many VPN connections the PIX can handle though before deciding that this is the way to go.

good luck with it!

 

[pinkpanther56]

Just out of curiosity if the budget won't stretch to a PIX would somethink like the Netgear in the link below be ok for such a small setup?

http://www.broadbandstuff.co.uk/product_info.php?products_id=346

If not do you have a good budget recommendation? (i'm not expecting it to give Cisco performance).

Cheers.

 

[Dublin73]

the Cisco PIX 501 is the same price....

http://www.hardware.com/search_category.asp?category=FG14&family_id=-1

It's an excellent product and getting information on it is quite easy on the internet (the tek tips website included)

 

[pinkpanther56]

The problem with Cisco kit is i always notice this 'Licence Qty: 10 users' or similar. Other vendors don't always have licence limits (or do they?)

Cheers.

 

[pinkpanther56]

I'm getting a bit confused with the whole XenApp / Presentation Server confusion. What is the latest version? We'll be installing it on 2008 server.

I'd like to buy a book so i can read up but i don't think there are any available for the new product will a book for the old version still be relevant?

Thanks.

 

[pgaliardo]

XenApp is the new presentation server. Presentation Server 4.5 is the latest version and can not be installed on Windows 2008. XenApp is available in a beta version and can be installed on Windows 2008, although I haven't tried it yet. I can tell you for sure that Presentation Server 4.5 will not install on Windows 2008. They've changed all the names of their products since the acquisition of Xen. XenApp is the new name for their Presentation Server.

 

[Dublin73]

Hi, regarding the PIX license quantity, different PIX models will give you more concurrent users. I can't really speak for other firewall products though, as I've only dealt with Cisco and Checkpoint $$$$. Have a good look around on the web.

If you've only got 10 or 15 users, accessing a few apps, you probably don't even need Citrix at all. Start out by getting your 2008 server up and running in Terminal Services mode. See how it performs for users inside the office, then see how it performs from the outside world, once you've set up your firewall.

In the past, it used to be the case, that over long distances, Citrix ICA by far outperformed just Microsoft RDP. I'd say though in Windows 2008, RDP could perform just as well as ICA.

Citrix offers you tons of other good features that Microsoft Terminal Server alone doesn't, but you may not have much need for these features.

Have a look at this article...

http://www.brianmadden.com/content/article/Do-you-need-Citrix-or-is-Terminal-Server-enough

 

[pinkpanther56]

@pgaliardo

Is there no version available at present that will install on 2008 server (other than beta)? If not what is the scheduled release date?



@Dublin73

We will be needing Citrix as eventually allot of our desktops will be replaced by thin clients and we'll be hosting a farm of probably 8+ servers so we decided to go straight for Citrix.

Thanks guys.

 

[pgaliardo]

No, there's not. As far as a release date, it seems to be a big secret with Citrix. I talked to someone at Citrx and they could not tell me a release date.

 

[Dublin73]

Thin clients typically can connect using Citrix and RDP, whichever one you choose. If you have multiple servers, Citrix is great for the load balancing and extra bells and whistles... but!!! I believe Windows 2008 Terminal services now also offers load balancing, whereas 2003 didn't.

By the way, I'd recommend looking at deploying 64 Bit Windows instead of 32 Bit. It performs far better, is gradually becoming the norm, and will get you 2 or 3 times the number of users per server, when you compare it to 32 bit.

I've done deployments where on average, one 64 Bit Citrix server operates efficiently with 100+ users on it. This was running a published desktop as well, maybe 4 or 5 applications per user.

The most I've seen to date on a 32 bit server (running without any lag in performance) is around 40 users.

food for thought, if you're considering going down the 32 bit road.

 

[pinkpanther56]

I've been told that the 2008 load balancing is improved but still doesn't scale as well as Citrix, both by a supplier and someone who is using 2003 and trying 2008. We'll be trying this for the next couple of months before a decision is made so we'll see.

Our first box will be x32 as it's only hosting upto a max of 30 connections for testing.
We're probably going to go with x64 after that but we have some incompatible apps so we're thinking about using a x32 virtual OS, i've been chating with someone who is trying this using VMWare.

pgaliardo, are Citrix even giving a before the end of the year sort of idea or is it a Microsoft style release date?

Cheers for the thoughts guys.

 

[pgaliardo]

If I recall, the most specific answer they gave me was "second half of the year". Sorry I don't have more to offer.

 

[Dublin73]

but we have some incompatible apps so we're thinking about using a x32 virtual OS"

.....a common misconception! To date I've seen very few applications that don't run on 64 Bit. Most applications out there are still 32 Bit.

Without going into the details too much, 32 Bit apps don't realize that they're installed and running on a 64 Bit system and perform quite well. In Windows x64 out of the box there are two Windows system folders, for 32 bit and for 64 bit. 32 Bit apps access the 32 bit system folder (called SysWOW64) for dlls etc.

in addition to this there is also a 32 bit section of the registry in Windows x64 for 32 bit apps. I forget the name, I think it's also SysWOW64. Have a look on google you'll find heaps of info on 32 bit apps running on windows x64.

note*** 32 Bit drivers do not run on a 64 Bit OS. So this is a consideration when setting up your printing etc..

 

[pinkpanther56]

You really haven't seen some of the apps that we run i know a few sites that can't get some of the apps we are running to work, education apps are notoriously poor quality not to mention the 16-Bit ones we'll be trying to get rid of them though. I am familiar with WOW and VDM's though so i know where you're coming from but we'll with start start as i know of certain issues, our MIS app for one is not supported on x64.

As for printer drivers we have quite a few old HP lasers that i'm not sure we could get x64 drivers for, these are all hosted on a 2003 server but if we can't get x64 drivers then we'll have to buy a new laser so that will have to wait.

Cheers.

 

[Dublin73]

for your printer drivers... it's good practice to use the drivers on the Windows OS CD. here's the surprising bit... the Windows Server 2003 x64 CD includes drivers for a lot of legacy printers, particularly HP, Laser Jet 4, Laser Jet II etc.

for the 32 bit apps...

I wouldn't run 32 bit and 64 bit servers in the same farm, even though you can. If most of your apps are 16 bit, then fair enough, go with an all 32 bit farm.

If a small percentage of your apps are troublesome, 16 bit etc., maybe throw them onto a 32 bit server and put the rest onto 64 bit

just my 2 cents worth. good luck with all of it!