Sufficient Upload for TS?

[Kenny782]

I have a server in the head office running SQL and servicing 6 users right now.

This company may be opening a new location.
20 users, 20 computers; simultaneously running Outlook cached mode and Terminal services to the above server.

Th best connection available short of a T1 at the new location is aDSL 4M/400k.

Does that sound like enough combined with exchange traffic?
I mean I know it would work, but I need to prevent lag as much as possible.

This TS application is their job, without it they just sit there twiddling their thumbs.

If need be I could talk them into a local server but complicates my life a bit when something doesn't work.

 

[58sniper]

Outlook shouldn't be a problem, at least once the initial sync is out of the way.

Dunno about RDP/TS access.

Pat Richard MVP
Plan for performance, and capacity takes care of itself. Plan for capacity, and suffer poor performance.

http://www.ucblogs.net/blogs/exchange/

 

[Roadki11]

I think the 400k is going to be a problem. You will need to tune the TS sessions that’s for sure. You will need to keep resolution at no more than 1024x768 and color depth at 15bit or less, knock TS encryption down to low, no audio mapping. The VPN is going to add overhead and the inherent issues, with ISP's routing traffic through the least expensive hops it’s going to add to latency. The users will experience lag, no question in my opinion, maybe not all the time but enough to make your life rough.

RoadKi11

"This apparent fear reaction is typical, rather than try to solve technical problems technically, policy solutions are often chosen." - Fred Cohen

 

[Roadki11]

I would also like to add that I would never run TS on a SQL server, the list is long why thats a terrible idea.

RoadKi11

"This apparent fear reaction is typical, rather than try to solve technical problems technically, policy solutions are often chosen." - Fred Cohen

 

[58sniper]

Yeah, I agree as well. TS should be on a dedicated server for both performance and security reasons.

Pat Richard MVP
Plan for performance, and capacity takes care of itself. Plan for capacity, and suffer poor performance.

http://www.ucblogs.net/blogs/exchange/

 

[Kenny782]

I would generally agree I've managed much larger environments.

But I'm consulting for a smaller business.
The head office is 4 people.

Maybe 5 in China, and all they do is access TS to access 1 app

So I can't justify a wall full of servers to be primarily used by 4 people.

Besides if you knew the details as to how this thing uses/accesses data...moving SQL would probably slow it down lol
I got the second server and isolated the application and it's data.

Right now I'm adding 20 users to that server so yes I'm considering alot of different options that include server changes/additions.

But first I'm trying to figure out bandwith.
If I have enough I can think about improving the environment in the head office.
Such as buying a new server just for TS and using the current one for SQL.

But if the circuit can't handle 20 TS sessions then I'm going to have think about local servers.

 

[itsp1965]

From what I remember TS/Citrix requires a minimum of 20Kbps per user session. Therefore if you have 20 simultaneous users, you have already "chewed up" 400Kbps of your traffic. As other folks have indicated, it also depends on how fine tuned your sessions are (low video resolutions, no audio, low encryption, etc)