Remote access solutions

If you're thinking of deploying this on a large scale, you may also wanna
think about your upgrades. Loading a patch/service pack will easily require
from 500mb to >1gb in downloads for your clients. Depending on how often you
patch and how fast their connections are, it may be something to bare in
mind.

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Brian Roberts <broberts@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> If you are running reports, a local client + VPN is much much slower -
> it copies some big data files to the client. For just light interactive
> use, it is slower but acceptable [*], I do that from home regularly.
>
> [*] For the standard Epicor 9 definition of "acceptable" :-)
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of schmangy20000
>
> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 3:36 PM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Remote access solutions
>
> Anyone out there have some advice on remote access to Epicotr 9? I'm
> thinking that terminal services over VPN tunnel would be faster than
> running the client locally and accessing the server over VPN.
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Gerry
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
*Waffqle Driggers*
*High End Dev, System Design, Profit Drinking
*
*:: 904.962.2887*
*:: waffqle@...*
*:: NO FAXES*

*

*


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Anyone out there have some advice on remote access to Epicotr 9? I'm thinking that terminal services over VPN tunnel would be faster than running the client locally and accessing the server over VPN.

Any input would be appreciated.

Gerry
Assuming your term serv is running at a healthy pace; it will almost
certainly be faster.

In our case, I'd say running the client over VPN takes about 4-5 times as
long as running it via RDP over VPN.

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:36 PM, schmangy20000 <gloranger@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> Anyone out there have some advice on remote access to Epicotr 9? I'm
> thinking that terminal services over VPN tunnel would be faster than running
> the client locally and accessing the server over VPN.
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Gerry
>
>
>



--
*Waffqle Driggers*
*High End Dev, System Design, Profit Drinking
*
*:: 904.962.2887*
*:: waffqle@...*
*:: NO FAXES*

*

*


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I do Epicor consulting/customization work with a variety of clients. With
about five or six of them, I run the client locally and access their
servers/database over VPN. I have very few issues with speed - prefer this
method over running RDP.



Kevin Simon



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
schmangy20000
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 3:36 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Remote access solutions





Anyone out there have some advice on remote access to Epicotr 9? I'm
thinking that terminal services over VPN tunnel would be faster than running
the client locally and accessing the server over VPN.

Any input would be appreciated.

Gerry





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Citrix is what we use, it works great. Lots more administration than
just Terminal Services.



Christopher W. Marsch

IT/Database Administrator

Mechanical Dynamics & Analysis, Ltd.

19E British American Blvd.

Latham, NY 12110

(518) 399-3616 x272

Cell: (518) 795-0200



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of schmangy20000
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 3:36 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Remote access solutions





Anyone out there have some advice on remote access to Epicotr 9? I'm
thinking that terminal services over VPN tunnel would be faster than
running the client locally and accessing the server over VPN.

Any input would be appreciated.

Gerry





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Interesting that you have good performance with that. However, on a professional level, I'm going to disagree with you that this is the best solution. Deploying RDP over VPN is my recommendation just like Waffqle said as well. In addition, to Gerry, please check with Epicor on their supported method for going this. I am pretty sure they only support RDP and not a thick client install to the appserver over VPN.

-James

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Simon
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 1:29 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Remote access solutions



I do Epicor consulting/customization work with a variety of clients. With
about five or six of them, I run the client locally and access their
servers/database over VPN. I have very few issues with speed - prefer this
method over running RDP.

Kevin Simon

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of
schmangy20000
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 3:36 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Remote access solutions

Anyone out there have some advice on remote access to Epicotr 9? I'm
thinking that terminal services over VPN tunnel would be faster than running
the client locally and accessing the server over VPN.

Any input would be appreciated.

Gerry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


________________________________
Technical information contained in this e-mail may be controlled by the United States Government, Department of State, International Traffic and Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR 120-130) which requires an export license prior to sharing with foreign persons. Lacking such license, ITAR technical data is limited to U.S. persons only. It is the responsibility of the organization and the individual in control of this data to abide by U.S. Export Laws. If you are not a U.S. person take no further action with this e-mail and contact sender immediately.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RDP over VPN works fine, VPN -> Direct Client works fine too as long as you
have a decent pipe. We do both and they both work well.

*Jose C Gomez*
*Software Engineer*
*
*
*checkout my new blog <http://www.usdoingstuff.com> *
*
*T: 904.469.1524 mobile
E: jose@...
http://www.josecgomez.com
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
<http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
<http://www.usdoingstuff.com>

*Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*



On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:36 PM, schmangy20000 <gloranger@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> Anyone out there have some advice on remote access to Epicotr 9? I'm
> thinking that terminal services over VPN tunnel would be faster than running
> the client locally and accessing the server over VPN.
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Gerry
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If you are running reports, a local client + VPN is much much slower -
it copies some big data files to the client. For just light interactive
use, it is slower but acceptable [*], I do that from home regularly.



[*] For the standard Epicor 9 definition of "acceptable" :-)



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of schmangy20000
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 3:36 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Remote access solutions





Anyone out there have some advice on remote access to Epicotr 9? I'm
thinking that terminal services over VPN tunnel would be faster than
running the client locally and accessing the server over VPN.

Any input would be appreciated.

Gerry





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]