Hi all I have a customer use the LTM for windows terminal server load balancing . They met a problem that the tcp 3389 health check was ok but the server was not available for RDP service. Do we have any advanced health monitor or any solution for this problem. Thanks and regards baoquan

you could use the wmi monitor, but I think that requires IIS to be running on each of your terminal server instances, which isn't a very efficient use of resources. I've yet to find a *nix script to validate the service availability. If you find one, please post back, you aren't alone in this issue.

Does any one resole this problem?

We experienced the same thing today...has anyone come to a resolution on it? I am researching ways to do this, but please post back if you have the answers. Thanks!

Byang and ScottB, What kinds of send and receive strings have you tried thusfar? And just to be clear, what versions are you both using?

I dont have any send or receive strings configured - just TCP:3389 running v9.4.7 HF2 Thank you for the quick reply, this is under the microscope of my management and would like to make them feel all wrm and fuzzy ;-)

Does LTM any advanced health monitor for RDP service?

21 Replies

hoolio
Cirrostratus
Dec 27, 2010
Nice work Humphrey! You could reference that executable in this external monitor template:

http://devcentral.f5.com/wiki/default.aspx/AdvDesignConfig/TemplateForExternalLtmMonitors.html

Aaron
JRahm
Admin
Dec 27, 2010
very cool! Many MANY people have requested this functionality over the years.
JRahm
Admin
Dec 28, 2010
I tested this out today and wrote it up. Fantastic work, Humphrey!

http://devcentral.f5.com/Tutorials/TechTips/tabid/63/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/1086419/Monitoring-Windows-Terminal-Services-from-BIG-IP.aspx Click Here
hoolio
Cirrostratus
Dec 28, 2010
Great guys. There are a ton of past requests on this. Anyone want to reply to these posts with the new solution?

Creating a Monitor that checks Windows Services?

http://devcentral.f5.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&view=topic&postid=85575&ptarget=85575

Monitoring a windows service

http://devcentral.f5.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&forumid=32&tpage=1&view=topic&postid=23312

Monitoring a Microsoft Windows Service

http://devcentral.f5.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&forumid=32&tpage=1&view=topic&postid=32382

Enable window services with an Irule

http://devcentral.f5.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&view=topic&postid=60221&ptarget=60221

Monitoring Microsoft Analysis Services

http://devcentral.f5.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&view=topic&postid=31011&ptarget=31011

Aaron
JRahm
Admin
Dec 28, 2010
Will do...and done.
JRahm
Admin
Dec 29, 2010
I got a comment on the article about wmic being heavy resource wise, and to take a look at winexe, so I'll probably do a write up on that as well and then maybe do some performance comparisons.
hwidjaja_37598
Altostratus
Dec 29, 2010
fyi, winexe can also be found in wmi-1.3.14/Samba/source/bin
JRahm
Admin
Dec 29, 2010
huh, that it is. So forget building from scratch... thanks. Was having trouble compiling it anyway. Thanks!
JRahm
Admin
Dec 29, 2010
wait...does winexe actually install a service on the windows server? It looks like that's what is being attempted:

[jrahm@localhost bin]$ winexe -U testdom/testaccount%testpassword //192.168.22.31 "sc query TermService"

[winexe/winexe.c:120:on_ctrl_pipe_error()] ERROR: Failed to install service winexesvc - NT code 0x00000424

If that's the case, that doesn't seem as desirable as using the wmi interface. Thoughts?
hwidjaja_37598
Altostratus
Dec 30, 2010
Yes, it seems like winexe copies winexesvc.exe to ADMIN$ share, creates winexesvc service, starts it and tries to connect to this service.

I personally prefer using wmi as most of windows server already running wmi and it doesn't fork another process, CMIIW ...