0

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?

PnP
  • 1,684
  • 8
  • 37
  • 65
  • 1
    Not to seem trite or sarcastic but... Because they're different? Because that's the way it was designed? – joeqwerty Oct 16 '13 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? – PnP Oct 16 '13 at 21:41
  • What about using a standard deployment? I'm assuming that would give you options as to the Connection Broker placement. – joeqwerty Oct 16 '13 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) – PnP Oct 16 '13 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. – Zoredache Oct 17 '13 at 00:38

0 Answers0