David Heggie's questions

I'm setting up a new Server 2012 R2-based RDS deployment publishing desktops to users based in three geographically distinct sites. All users need access to the same applications and resources.

Is it possible to have RDS direct users to a specific session host depending on their client IP address or AD site? This would enable me to have a couple of RD session host servers at each site and have the users connect to a host local to them, rather than over a slow WAN link to the main office.

I can't find a way of doing this, and it may not be possible, but any advice is gratefully received.

I have a production database hosted on SQL Server 2008R2 Standard that is replicated to a second server running the same version of SQL server via a subscription to the production database. The subcriber database is used for running SQL reports on the data. Deletes aren't replicated, so the reporting database is pretty large compared with the production published database, which is cleaned up weekly.

I'm planning on replacing the server that hosts the published database and was wondering what the best course of action was to ensure that the subscriber database doesn't loose any data. Is this a sensible outline of the steps to follow:

1. Restore a copy of the latest backup from the old production database to the new server
2. Publish this new database using the same settings as the old database
3. Unsubscribe (or whatever the proper term for breaking the replication is) the reporting subscribed database from the old published database
4. Subscribe the reporting database to the new publication

Is it as simple as that, or is there something I've missed that could turn around and bite me? The main thing I want to ensure is that the database used for reporting (the subscribed database) doesn't loose any data, and continues to receive new replicated data from the new database.

Thanks

I am currently trialling an install of Windows Server 2008R2 + SQL Server 2008 R2 using license keys from my company's TechNet subscription.

If the trial is successful, I'd like to bring the server into production as is (there's a lot of config needed for it that I don't want to repeat) so my question really is is it possible to change the Windows and SQL server licenses from TechNet ones to "proper" volume licenses and legally use the server in production? Or do I have to reinstall everything with volume licences?

I have a VPN setup between a remote office with 2 ADSL connections (8Mb downstream, 512Kb upstream) and a main office with a 10Mb EFM connection (10Mb both up and down).

The VPN is an IPSec connection using a DrayTek 2930 router for the ADSL and a DrayTek 3200 router at the EFM end. However, I'm unable to get speeds over this connection (tested with iperf) of anything over 600Kb or so down from the main office (traffic will pretty much always be from the main office to the remote office)

Whilst I realise that there is an overhead and I'm never going to get the "full" bandwidth available over this VPN, I'd like to think that there's something I should be looking at that may help improve it.

I've tried using the DrayTek's built-in "VPN Trunking" features which are supposed to load-balance connections, but this doesn't seem to improve matters much.

I guess my question is - is this the kind of performance I should expect from this kind of setup and I'll just have to live with it, or should I be able to squeeze something more out of it through some VPN magic?

I'm a bit of a VPN newbie, so please go easy on me ...

I'm trying to use the VPN trunking capabilities of the DrayTek Vigor 2930 firewall to bond two IPSec VPN connections to a Cisco ASA 5520 device and I'm getting myself tied in knots and hope someone here with more knowledge / experience can help.

I have a remote site with two ADSL connections and the DrayTek box. The main office site has the Cisco ASA device. I am able to setup a single IPSec connection between the two sites on either of the ADSL connections' public IP addresses, but as soon as I try to use the VPN bonding, nothing works. The VPN tunnels are both still up, but the traffic is getting lost somewhere. I suspect it's due to the ASA not knowing how to route the traffic back over the VPN - one minute, traffic from my remote office's network is coming from public ip address #1, the next it's coming from public address #2 and it doesn't know what to do. Well, that's my newbie impression of what's going wrong, but I don't really know:

1. If this is really what's happening

2. If what I'm trying to do (bond two VPN connections from a single remote network to improve the bandwidth / resiliency) is possible with the kit I've got

Could anyone help?

We have a Windows domain and run WSUS for managing client updates. This is all working fine, except when laptop users take their laptops home. When these machines are on their own private network, they merrily download updates from Microsoft Update, regardless of their approval status in WSUS on our office network.

Does anyone have any info on how to configure the clients so that they'll only update when on the office network, and not when they're on some random other network?

Thanks

Possible Duplicate:
Can you help me with my software licensing question?

I'm trying to find the answer to this question, but not really getting anywhere. I'm hoping a ServerFault Cisco Licensing expert may be able to help.

We have a new Cisco ASA 5520 that we're using at the moment for an IPSec site-site VPN connection. We're looking at adding the AnyConnect Essentials license to the box, which will enable 750 SSL VPN connections for client machines with the AnyConnect client installed. What I can't quite get an answer to is - will this license affect the box's IPSec capabilities in any way (the AnyConnect FAQ is a bit vague to me)

I realise that the essentials license won't enable us to use Secure Desktop or clientless SSL connections - neither of which we need. We need IPSec site-site connections, and SSL VPN for client machines with the AnyConnect client installed - is the Essentials license good enough for this, or will we have to shell out for the "premium" licenses?

Edit: In case it's relevant, the box at the moment has a "VPN Plus" license.

Thanks ...

David