Cisco Application :: Health Probe For RDP Farm 3389
Aug 19, 2012
I have an RDP server farm that lost a disk. The RDP service was still running but users were unable to log in. I'd like to create a health probe that does maybe a combination of TCP probe for port 3389 and something that can determine if the drive that stores user profiles is available.
I cannot add any new service (http or ftp) to the server. Is there any way I can check SNMP mibs on the windows server or maybe WMI through TCL?
I have a requirement to select a farm based on source IP address. I tried creating a match all class-map that matches on the virtual-address and source address but I get this message.LB01/Admin(config-cmap)# match source-address x.x.x.75 255.255.255.255 Error: Only one match virtual-address is allowed in a match-all class-map and it cannot mix with any other match type To me this is the only place where it makes sense to set the source match criteria.
I have four ACE 4710. Each pair of ACE is in one geographical location. Probes are configured so that it is checking regular regex (HTTP GET).When there is need rserver update we change text in our testpage.html (for ie. from "OK" to "SUSPEND" ) so that probe detect fail. In fact rservers are still operational, but should not accept new connections. This works fine. BUT I observed that established connection/sessions did not end up after probe fails. ACE probably wait for openned/established connections to end up and it is what I am askign for.What happens if probe fails but in fact rserver is operational? I thought that if probe fails it also end up/cut all established connections to rserver. But seems it is not true.
I have a physical server running behind the ACE module ACE20-MOD-K9. The Server has several virtual machines. One of that virtual machines, has a WEB SERVER running virtual https servers. For example, server with IP address 10.0.0.20/24, has serveral virtual HTTPs servers as of urll... So, if you nslookup the servers, they all respond with 10.0.0.20 IP address. So if I do url...goes to 10.0.0.20 and read the VIRTUAL SERVER config and replies back to the request.Now, I am trying to verify that the TCP connection (443) and the HTTPS server itself is up and running but only for the url... site and not for the other 2.The problem that I am facing is tha the HTTPS probe fails randomly. The TCP probe works fine.
I am wondering if there is a method to redirect particular URLs to individual real servers in a server farm.Scenario: We have an url which is setup on our ACE4710s (A3 2.4) to load balancer to a particular server farm as per standard setup i.e.Customers access [URL] on an external VIP, this is then load balanced to a server farm "SF_WEBSITE" consisting of 2 real servers "Server_A" and "Server_B". Nothing difficult in this set up. However, I have eeen asked if it is possible to redirect certain urls to individual servers within the server farm "SF_WEBSITE": e.g.
Action 1 - Customers access [URL] is redirected to "Server_A" only
Action 2 - Customers access [URL] is redirected to "Server_B" only
Default Action - Customer access [URL] anything else is redirected to server farm "SF_WEBSITE" and is load balanced between "Server_A" and "Server_B"
The Standard Class Maps and Policy would be something like:
policy-map type loadbalance first-match SLB_WEBSITE class class-default serverfarm SF_WEBSITE
Where I thought I would need something like:
class-map type http loadbalance match-all CMAP_AREA1 description CMAP used to capture specific URL for area 1 2 match http url /area1 class-map type http loadbalance match-all CMAP_AREA2 description CMAP used to capture specific URL for area 2 2 match http url /area2
I think the above method is ok for 1 instance, but if it test successfully, my company would want to to roll this out across dozens of server farm configurations each consisting of numerous real servers, which will make the administration and implementation time overheads massive, not to mention complicating and lengthening the configuration.
I want to configure my ACE so that if a probe fails, it fails over to the backup rserver, BUT it won't failback to the primary rserver until manual intervention is complete. The problem is we don't want an rserver to fail and failover to secondary, then failback to primary, repeat... (flip-flopping). I want to be able to have time to get on the server and find out what may have caused the probes to fail before it fails back.
I'm a C# programmer and as part of my software I need to monitor some Cisco Catalyst 3560V2 24 switches using SNMP (By reading MIB/S data).Apparently this switch supports more than 50 different MIBs.My question is which MIB/MIBS contains general health data (parameters) that may determine if the switch is OK, Degraded or Malfunctioned.
I am working as a Network Administrator. Here I have to manage Cisco Switches 2960 and 4500 Series, Active Directory, Database Server, Exchange Server, File Servers, IP Telophony, Fortigate Firewall, 2960 Router, Wifi availability within Company. Although, in case of any disaster we will contact to vendor for solution, but the management told me to deploy any Software/Network Monitor which will facilitate to manage all this, i.e, overall network Health check, Performance Measurement, Fault Tolerance.
how the CDP device sensor probe works with ISE ?What I am trying to do, is to identify different Cisco Wireless Access Point models (i.e. LAP 1142) with ISE.Since the APs do speak CDP (I can see the AP devices on the switch), this should be possible with the CDP device sensor on the switch, shouldn't it I have done the following so far: Configured the switch to talk to ISE via radius accounting: [code] Should this config make the switch send CDP information about connected devices to the ISE (via radius accounting) ?How do the device sensors work ?
I have faced a problem with configuring Cisco 3750G series switches as Sever farm switches with redudance.
servers have 2NIC (1GBps) and both are bridged for redundant connections.In both switches all ports get green coluor except one port on Secondary SW. I saw some Spanning tree block port status on that switch.when i type Show cdp neghbor command on switch i can see other switch through a server connected port. Also Spannig tree root bridge election is occured through that port . Simply i need to configure both switches to pass traffic through there uplinks them selves.. but it seems like Secondry switch pass its traffic through primary switch ( i think according to STP ) usinginterconnection of bridge port of a server. [code]
192.168.1.10 --> ASA 1-----> ASA 2-------> ASA 3----> server (172.21.16.15)
We have opened 3389 , 80 & 445 ports on all firewalls ( ASA 1, ASA 2, ASA ) for server (172.21.16.15) from (192.168.1.10).We are able to see connection in ASA 1 under show connection for 3389, 445 ,80.
We are not able to see connections in ASA 2 & ASA 3 under show connection for 3389. But we are able to see hits in ACl.
So from a security standpoint... PPTP through Windows RRAS then RDP to the server?,Open port 3389 to the server and rdp direct? would think that having a VPN out front would block people from attempting a connection, but if the VPN username and RDP username are the same, I feel like its about the same.
I have a current issue with my 2008 R2 machine.I cannot get Remote Desktop to work. Client machine is Windows 7 Ultimate, windows firewall on the Server machine is disabled, Telnet to port 3389 works (as in, it doesn't error out it gives me a blank screen), the account I'm trying to login to is the only account on the machine (Administrator). Remote Desktop service is installed and set to allow connections on the less secure mode.
At one of our client premises they have an Cisco 1841 router. We need to connect from outside (other location in another country) with Remote Desktop connection port 3389 to an internal IP address ( a server).From any IP address it have to permit a connection on port 3389 to be forwarded to the server.
Below is my show run of a Cisco 800 router (Two VLAN's, single WAN) that works fine. Problem is that in this senario port 3389 is open for everyone. Only two remote users are allowed to connect trough port 3389. Let's say WAN IP's : 126.96.36.199 and 188.8.131.52. How would a good access-rule look like to fix it?
no service padservice tcp-keepalives-inservice tcp-keepalives-outservice timestamps debug datetime msecservice timestamps log datetime msecservice password-encryptionservice sequence-numbers!hostname cisco-867!boot-start-markerboot-end-marker!logging buffered 51200logging console criticalenable secret 5 ***!no aaa new-modelmemory-size iomem 10clock timezone GMT 1clock summer-time GMT date Mar 30 2002 1:00 Oct 26 2035 1:59!!no ip source-route!!ip dhcp excluded-address 192.168.10.200 192.168.10.254!ip dhcp pool Vlan2 network 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 domain-name dsl.local default-router 192.168.10.254 dns-server 184.108.40.206 220.127.116.11 lease 0 8!!ip cefno ip bootp serverno ip domain lookup!!!archive log config
I'm trying to determine whether Cisco has any equivalent (in any platform) to some of the existing firewall rules within our iptables infrastructure. [code] What this does, is allow port forwards on port 3389/rdp. However, if a single IP opens too many connections within a timeframe, it starts dropping new ones.This is a critical requirements for certain security scenarios, such as preventing RDP brute forcing. A similar principle can be applied to 22/ssh.I've had a look around, rate limiting searches generally land me on QoS based discussions. I've seen people ask similar questions and get referred to CBAC. Whilst I can see similarly worded functions there such as limiting "half open" connections, I don't see anything there that limits the actual number of connection attempts you can make.
I've enabled RDP on a laptop, but I can't connect to it. Pinging the laptop works. nmap shows ports open, but not RDP. netstat on the laptop shows nothing listening on 3389. I've also tried rebooting. [code]
It's been a while since I've done a lot with a PIX config so what is the best way to allow access for 2 IP addresses that need to RDP into a server here inside our network. They also wanted to have ports redirected, 3391 to 3389 and 3397 to 3389.
I have an ASA pair configured to replace a router that hosts a collection of IPSec Tunnels. Tunnels appear to work. I am lab'ing some additional controls that I would like to implement. On the Production Router that i plan to replace with the ASA's the current Tunnels are all wide open (all traffic allowed to pass). I was hoping to lock things down a little without having to reconfigure all of the Tunnels. My though was that an ACL on the Inside Interface blocking selected traffic Out (so into the LAN) should not impact the stability of the Tunnels but allow me to restrict some traffic from entering the LAN. One port that I was attempting to block is RDP 3389. When this ACL is applied to the inside interface it does not block Port 3389 at all. What am I missing? Is it that the trffic is being allowed because it is coming through one of my 'open' Tunnels?
Shouldn't IPSec Tunnel traffic be processed by the Inside Interface ACL just like all other traffic?