Forum Discussion

bthompson_25774's avatar
bthompson_25774
Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
May 06, 2016

load-balancing microsoft RDS w/ iApp

I used the 'f5.microsoft_rds_session_host.v1.0.2rc1' iApp to load-balance two RDS host servers, following the below whitepaper.

 

https://www.f5.com/pdf/deployment-guides/microsoft-rds-session-host-dg.pdf

 

My vserver is green. How do i test this? Should i just be able to RDP to the vserver? I'm getting 'an internal errror has occured' when i try to rdp to the vservers. The nodes respond to rdp directly.

 

only thing i haven't done is this:

 

Additional Steps Remote DesktopYou must configure a DNS entry for each fully qualified host name that the clients use to access the Remote Desktop servers. Each DNS record must resolve to the IP address you configured for the BIG-IP virtual server defined in the High Availability section.

 

Is this just DNS resolution for the vserver on the client? Or Does the bigip need DNS for each node?

 

4 Replies

  • I am trying to do the same, and having the same error. Has anyone successfully made load balancing MS RDS Servers work?

     

  • have you done the DNS part aquabat104 mentions?

     

    where do you get that error? on the RDP client?

     

  • Ok, so I deleted the iApps application and created it again, and this time it worked. Not sure what I had wrong in the first attempt, but it is working now and that's a good thing.

     

    While we are on the subject, I have an HTTPS VS with APM policy using Advanced Resource Assign to present webtop and remote destop. The remote desktop is pointing to the iApp application VS and working great to load balance a single published app from multiple MS RDS servers. I noticed the handoff from the APM policy to the iApp VS happens internal (that traffic never leaves the F5). We want to prevent anyone from hitting the iApp VS directly (they must go through the HTTPS VS), but we are not using AFM. Can you suggest a way to restrict this?

     

  • AFM shouldn't be needed, iRule of even packet filters should have pretty much the same effect.

     

    the issue is how to see the difference if you don't SNAT internally. if you don't see the solution right away i would advise you to start a new question.