BRRABill's Field Report With XenServer

olivier

Don't know.

But we are doing this in the code:

    if auto_poweron
      yield xapi.call 'VM.add_to_other_config', ref, 'auto_poweron', 'true'
      yield xapi.setPoolProperties({autoPowerOn: true})
    else
      yield xapi.call 'VM.remove_from_other_config', ref, 'auto_poweron'

So in theory, this should work.

BRRABill

On my Server 2003 VM, whenever I go to console, it loads the following dialog box. I hit CANCEL and the console shows up.

Does not do this on my Server 2012 eval box.

Any thoughts on why it does this? Is this standard?

Dashrender

@BRRABill said:

On my Server 2003 VM, whenever I go to console, it loads the following dialog box. I hit CANCEL and the console shows up.

Does not do this on my Server 2012 eval box.

Any thoughts on why it does this? Is this standard?

Yep...Because the older version of RDP doesn't have authentication like the new one. So assuming you're using Windows 7 or newer on the client side, the RDP client in Win7 or newer is looking for that authentication - which it gets from Server 2012, but not from 2003 - and it's warning you of such.

BRRABill

@Dashrender

Is the "console" tab using RDP?

Dashrender

@BRRABill said:

@Dashrender

Is the "console" tab using RDP?

No the console tab in XC is using whatever protocol Citrix decided to use to pull the console in, it's completely outside of Windows.

Open mouth, insert foot - apparently I don't know what I'm talking about he has a picture where XC is demanding RDC info.. the above show picture..

BRRABill

PROOF!

scottalanmiller

@BRRABill said:

@Dashrender

Is the "console" tab using RDP?

Might, it is an open protocol. Lots of things use it. I assumed VNC as that is the standard, but RDP is totally possible.

scottalanmiller

@Dashrender said:

No the console tab in XC is using whatever protocol Citrix decided to use to pull the console in, it's completely outside of Windows.

All of this is absolutely true... except possible the "no" at the beginning.

BRRABill

I thought using RDP to manage servers was a ML no-no.

scottalanmiller

@BRRABill said:

I thought using RDP to manage servers was a ML no-no.

You aren't using it to manage the servers, you are using it to install them and you aren't connected to the server with it, but to the platform.

And it IS a no no regardless, you should not be managing a server post install from the console at all. RDP is a no no because you should not be at the console.

Dashrender

@BRRABill said:

I thought using RDP to manage servers was a ML no-no.

I'm wondering where that came from?

While I do try to use RSAT whenever possible, the convinence of RDPing into a server sometimes just can't be beat.

Heck i was just RDP'ed into my Exchange and AD1 servers...

Dashrender

@scottalanmiller said:

And it IS a no no regardless, you should not be managing a server post install from the console at all. RDP is a no no because you should not be at the console.

To me saying this is tantamount to saying that you should never SSH into a Linux box - instead you should be sending remote commands to the Linux box.

scottalanmiller

@Dashrender said:

@BRRABill said:

I thought using RDP to manage servers was a ML no-no.

I'm wondering where that came from?

While I do try to use RSAT whenever possible, the convinence of RDPing into a server sometimes just can't be beat.

Heck i was just RDP'ed into my Exchange and AD1 servers...

It's not a very strong thing. But it goes against modern philosophies from all sides. On the "good systems admins" side, tools like RSAT and PowerShell are supposed to be better. On the DevOps side, you never log into to anything, ever.

RDP becomes a no no because in either of those ideal cases, the GUI isn't even installed so RDP gets you nothing but an expensive command prompt that PowerShell is better at, anyway.

BRRABill

So it really comes down to a GUI vs non-GUI thing again.

But, for example, Server 2003 ... there is no other option.

scottalanmiller

@Dashrender said:

@scottalanmiller said:

And it IS a no no regardless, you should not be managing a server post install from the console at all. RDP is a no no because you should not be at the console.

To me saying this is tantamount to saying that you should never SSH into a Linux box - instead you should be sending remote commands to the Linux box.

No, it's tantamount to saying you should never fire up X on a Linux Server and I've never met a real Linux Admin that didn't agree.

Basically, if you hold Windows to the same standard as the 90% or more Linux Admin community, you never RDP, you PS. (RDP is equal on Windows and Linux here, equally possible and equally treated.)

scottalanmiller

@BRRABill said:

So it really comes down to a GUI vs non-GUI thing again.

But, for example, Server 2003 ... there is no other option.

PowerShell, RSAT.... what are you doing in 2003 that the standard tools don't cover?

scottalanmiller

I'm not saying that you shouldn't make an exception for one old server that is going away... just saying that had you approached it from the no GUI mentality from day one, you could probably have been GUIless for well over a decade.

BRRABill

@scottalanmiller said:

PowerShell, RSAT.... what are you doing in 2003 that the standard tools don't cover?

Is 2003 available non-GUI?

When I click on console, that's what comes up. The GUI.

scottalanmiller

@BRRABill said:

@scottalanmiller said:

PowerShell, RSAT.... what are you doing in 2003 that the standard tools don't cover?

Is 2003 available non-GUI?

When I click on console, that's what comes up. The GUI.

No, but you didn't need to log into it.

Dashrender

@BRRABill said:

@scottalanmiller said:

PowerShell, RSAT.... what are you doing in 2003 that the standard tools don't cover?

Is 2003 available non-GUI?

When I click on console, that's what comes up. The GUI.

Don't think that's what he means... He means you could have been doing things like making new users, new file shares, etc.. all from the command line instead of using the GUI.