Re: 2008 TS Web
It sounds like there's a problem with the way it was published. Can you
double check the TS Gateway settings dialog in TS RemoteApp Manager?
It should be set to "Use these TS Gateway server settings:", with the
gateway name filled in. Also, if "Bypass TS Gateway server for local
addresses" is checked, is the client on the same network as the TSs?
Rob
"Richard@dt" <Richarddt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:82D6AB0A-C6EC-42FD-A69E-EE5128716FFE@microsoft.com...
> Hello Rob
>
> We've published a RemoteApp to use the TS Gateway, but when you execute
> the
> app from the XP client, the client uses 3389 to access the app, not 443?
> We
> only want to allow 443 on our Firewall.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> "Rob Leitman [MS]" wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure I understand what you're describing. I'll go over how
>> things
>> are supposed to work, and you can explain where there's a mismatch.
>>
>> TS Web Access is a website that shows the list of RemoteApp programs:
>>
>> IE < -- > IIS /TSWA
>> (port 80)
>> (can be reconfigured to use HTTPS / port 443)
>>
>> When you publish a RemoteApp program, you can configure it to use TS
>> Gateway, or not.
>>
>> If there's no TS Gateway, and you click on a RemoteApp, you get:
>>
>> IE/MsTscAx <--> TS
>> (port 3389)
>>
>> If there is a TS Gateway, and you click on a RemoteApp, you get:
>>
>> IE/MsTscAx <--> TS Gateway <--> TS
>> (port 443) (port 3389)
>>
>> Does that help?
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> "Richard@dt" <Richarddt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:09E60A76-F8B2-4B55-AEF0-7E8FE123768C@microsoft.com...
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > I have depoyed a 2008 Server, and have configured TS Web access and TS
>> > Gateway.
>> >
>> > According to the product notes, 2008 should (PAT) https from the front
>> > end
>> > to 3389 at the back-end. When I look at the packet captures, we
>> > authenticate
>> > on 443, but use 3389 to the back-end TS Server?
>> >
>> > I have searched high and low at MS and via Google, and so far nothing?
>> > I
>> > must be doing something fundamentally wrong?
>> >
>> > Any help gratefully appreciated
>>
>>