Why does server 2012 need to have a RD Connection Broker Server Role when 2008R2 TS installations were as simple as just installing your Session Host Manager and Licensing Manager?
-
1Not to seem trite or sarcastic but... Because they're different? Because that's the way it was designed?– joeqwertyOct 16, 2013 at 21:38
-
A totally fair answer indeed, I'm just a little confused with regards to the setup - I assume I can just run a Quick Session Deployment on all the TS's I want to build in my domain (all RD Servers in separate geographical sites) and it won't matter my domain ends up with 6 or 7 Connection Brokers?– PnPOct 16, 2013 at 21:41
-
What about using a standard deployment? I'm assuming that would give you options as to the Connection Broker placement.– joeqwertyOct 16, 2013 at 21:45
-
Potentially, but I just want each Terminal Server in each site to be completely indepedent - i.e. can do everything it needs to completely on it's own (including licensing). So I assume a Quick Deploy on each server is the best way to go as this gives you everything you need and a Default SessionCollection straight off(excluding the license server)– PnPOct 16, 2013 at 21:49
-
Perhaps Microsoft was trying to simplify their code. So instead of having two cases broker, or not broker, now they can just assume that a session broker is present.– ZoredacheOct 17, 2013 at 0:38
Add a comment
|