Choose your NetScaler … wisely

I spend a lot of my time breaking down the different models of Citrix NetScaler appliances and different Software Editions within the Citrix NetScaler portfolio.

I decided to set up a blog about this since the path is usually pretty much (lengthy but) the same. This does not mean the answer is always easy because there are a lot of questions that need to be answered.

The first thing I would like to get off my chest is the following: Stop seeing/selling the Citrix NetScaler as a replacement for Secure Gateway. It is so much more than that. I often have discussions with various engineers and consultants telling me that Citrix NetScaler is so expensive for a Remote Access solution because Secure Gateway always used to be free. No offense but a Citrix NetScaler solution belongs to the networking department, not the Citrix XenApp sys admin department. Or maybe limited.

That leads me to the first difficult thing of a Citrix NetScaler project. The adoption of the Citrix NetScaler appliances to the networking guys of an organization. They need to embrace the solution to make this a success. For some reason they too see it as a ‘’Citrix’’ solution. For that reason one of the most important meetings to setup is usually with the networking guys to try to explain the L3-L7 functionality of the Citrix NetScaler solution. When they realize it competes with F5, Juniper, Cisco, etc then we are on the right track.

NetScaler Gateway or NetScaler Standard Edition

Usually the first question of a customer is regarding something simple like replacing the Remote Access solution. Since the NetScaler is going to be the main platform for publishing Citrix publications a NetScaler Gateway can be considered as a valid option. This is when I tell a customer it would be wise to spend a little extra on the NetScaler Standard Edition since this would leverage the solution be having full load balancing capabilities (among others). When you compare prices between the NetScaler Gateway and NetScaler Standard Edition you will see that the Standard Edition will be somewhat more expensive but I for one think that it is worth the difference given the feature set that come with the Standard Edition. Of course the NetScaler Gateway can always be upgraded to a NetScaler Standard Edition (or higher) if you will.

Another feature of Citrix NetScaler Standard Edition is the ability to run Citrix Web Interface on the appliance. Honestly, I do think is not really that important anymore since Citrix Web interface is going to be replaced by Citrix StoreFront and as of yet there are no plans of putting StoreFront on the NetScaler (that I know of). Of course for some situations it can still be a feasible solution. There is still the ability to dismiss multiple Microsoft IIS Servers by using Web Interface on Citrix NetScaler.

Virtual, Physical or Logical

I am aware this needs some explanation. Let’s start of with the Virtual.

Virtual (or VPX)

I hardly ever, ever, ever, sell the Citrix NetScaler VPX appliance. Only for use of Lab or Testing environment or really small, small, small businesses where the use case is to implement a remote access solution for a small number of users.

It happens that customers come to me and tell me they are thinking of purchasing a Citrix NetScaler VPX solution and would like my advise on which we will have this breakdown which changes their mindset about going for the VPX solution. I have by no means of interest of selling MPX over VPX, I just give a breakdown of the pro’s and cons for various solutions.

1. The first common mistake is the idea that VPX is cheaper because it is virtual (yes assumptions, the foundation of every well thought out IT project :-)), well, there goes the first bubble. Ask your Citrix Solution Advisor for an estimate of a Citrix NetScaler VPX 1000 and a Citrix NetScaler MPX 5550/5560 and you will be amazed.

2. No hypervisor resources guaranteed. The VPX platform runs on an organization’s hypervisor. Whenever I ask a hypervisor support engineer if they are not overcommitting resources, the answer is hardly ever no. It would not even be of first that I would even have to explain overcommitting in an hypervisor environment. But in an overcommitting environment it means that important hardware resources are shared among multiple virtual instances. Meaning that hardware resources can only be limited or even not guaranteed since it’s shared over multiple virtual instances.

3. No hardware acceleration. This one is pretty much inline with the above statement, the MPX has hardware accelerator card for encrypting/decrypting SSL connections. Within a VPX you would be dependent of hardware resources of the hypervisor. Of course this one becomes more important when the number of connections are significant.

4. No need for a HA solution. This one may seem a little strange but it pops up once and awhile. Customers choosing a single Citrix NetScaler VPX appliance because they have VMware HA and DRS and rely on snapshotting of the VM’s making the solution highly available. Agreed, in some cases it might work but it depends on what the accepted downtime is for the given solution. If this is a couple of hours or a day that would be fine. You would have to keep in mind that a single appliance solution could require a full restore of the VM dependent on the issue. This means restore from snapshot/backup but could also be a new installation of the VM and restore of the configuration. This would require the relevant knowledge of how to which is not always present in my opinion. Also keep in mind that Citrix NetScaler VPX does not vMotion well, I’ve seen hanging Citrix NetScaler vMotion VM’s.

5. Bandwidth. A Citrix NetScaler VPX comes in different (bandwidth) flavors (5, 10, 200, 1000 and 3000). I have done a number of PoC’s with the Citrix NetScaler VPX and see them miserably fail with at least the 5 and 10 by the solution consuming bandwidth (I try to disregard the Express version which is 5 as much as I can). It could be a solution though if you are using DSR (Direct Server Return) Load Balancing solutions (meaning that the traffic is not actually flowing through the NetScaler). The thing to remember is that the Bandwidth of the VPX is end-to-end on all interfaces it has, so if you have a Citrix NetScaler VPX 1000 with 2 virtual interfaces the 1000Mbit is being counted over all interfaces (so no 2 x 1000 Mbit).

Physical (or MPX)

Usually when I have given a customer some of the somewhat ‘’drawbacks’’ listed above and convinced the networking guys of the networking features of the appliance they are tending towards the MPX platform.

1. Bandwidth. The Bandwidth of an MPX is somewhat listed differently then that of it’s VPX variant. Citrix calls this ‘’Kernel Bandwidth” or “L7 Bandwidth”, this last one can be a little bit confusing because it implies that L3 (or Dirty Load Balancing) would not be intermitted to the Bandwidth limit. This is not the case.
Here a list of the most commonly deployed appliances and there Kernel Bandwidth:
- MPX 5550 (0.5Gbps) (Upgradeable to an MPX 5560 (1Gbps) by software license);
- MPX 8200 (2.0Gbps) (Upgradeable to an MPX 8400(4Gbps) by software license);
- MPX 8400 (4.0Gbps) (Upgradeable to an MPX 8600(6Gbps) by software license).
More information on the different MPX platform models:
http://www.citrix.com/content/dam/citrix/en_us/documents/products/netscaler-data-sheet.pdf

2. Rackspace. Yes, as you might expect an MPX appliance is physical which means it requires Rackspace. Although for the entire 55xx and 8xxx it is 1U per appliance, but still Rackspace.

Logical (or SDX)

An Citrix NetScaler SDX is a so-called hypervisor appliance. It runs on Citrix XenServer, but a special server of XenServer (SR-OIV). In a nutshell it means that the Citrix NetScaler VPX that run on this hypervisor has direct access to hardware resources. That’s why the number of virtual appliances on the different models is limited.

I think the SDX will be the more common appliance for customers to acquire. There are a couple of reasons for this.

1. A lot of security compliances by companies do not allow machines to have a connection to a perimeter network (like DMZ) and a internal network at the same time. Over time I see that customers are allowing more logical segregation of the network by machines that touch multiple networks. For instance hypervisors that have VM’s in a perimeter network and internal network. This is where a Citrix NetScaler SDX could be really beneficial. On the SDX you could have a Citrix NetScaler VPX for remote access on the perimeter network and a Citrix NetScaler VPX on the internal network for Load Balancing purposes.

2. Platinum Edition. On Citrix NetScaler SDX you can run multiple instance of Citrix NetScaler and they are licensed with the Platinum Edition of Citrix NetScaler software. This means that L7 App Firewall could/would/should be deployed on all of the Citrix NetScaler VPX appliances.

3. Upgrade MPX. Citrix has recently announced that even the Citrix NetScaler MPX 8400 can be upgraded to an SDX platform. This used to be from the MPX 11500 which made it far fetched for almost any company that I know. Since the MPX 8200 and 8400 are the same hardware this means that there are upgrade paths from even the MPX 8200. The thing to keep in mind is that on Citrix NetScaler SDX 8400 only 5 virtual appliances can be deployed.

4. Third party appliances. Citrix has opened up the SDX platform for 3rd party to create appliances for the SDX platform.

Other decisions that can be of influence

Copper/Fiber

If your organization requires fiber connections that you will have to purchase at least the Citrix NetScaler MPX 8200 series or higher. The 8200 comes with options for connecting SFP or SFP+ fiber connections.

Out of Band Management

If your organizations requires Out-of-Band Management you will have to purchase at least the Citrix NetScaler MPX 8200 series or higher.

Replacing Microsoft Forefront TMG

We do a lot of implementation where we replace Microsoft TMG with Citrix NetScaler as for Reverse Proxy solutions. Since Microsoft has announced the Microsoft TMG to be En-of-Life with no replacement products Citrix NetScaler can come in to place. Microsoft Exchange is such an example of solutions we publish through Citrix NetScaler. A big advantage of Citrix NetScaler is that it can integrate 3rd party token authentication to add that extra layer of security for publishing your mail to users. (Keep in mind, Citrix NetScaler Enterprise Edition minimum requirement for AAA functionality).

Security, Business and Technical

One of the first conversation I will have regarding a Citrix NetScaler project is with Security and Business. The reason for this is that they often have conflicting wishes and desires. Often the Business has many progressive plans for making possibilities work to make their users work more productively.  Yet, when the Security finds out about these plans they can contradict with Security Compliancy. So, one of the first tasks is to make sure these departments align. If you do not give this the attention it needs it will come back to you. Technical seems to be irrelevant and it sort of is. Technically almost anything is possible with Citrix NetScaler, that’s the reason why they are last in line.

Network and High Availability

The last item I would like to point out is network (and High Availability) and the options there are using Citrix NetScaler. The Software Edition of a Citrix NetScaler is very much dependent of the type of network that exist at the customer. If a customer is running a single ISP, single datacenter (or server location) a Citrix NetScaler Standard Edition with HA (High Availability will suffice. It becomes more interesting when a customer has two datacenter locations which uses different ISP’s. Then a Citrix NetScaler Enterprise Edition in a GSLB configuration becomes often/usually) the favor of choice.

1. Single appliance. This I would never recommend.

2. HA (High Availability). This is the most common one used. You buy two appliance and they run in an Active/Passive Cluster. They can be in the same subnet, they can be in different subnet (INC mode). Drawback is that you buy 2 appliances and only use one. Available from Standard Edition and up.

3. GSLB. All appliances run standalone in a GSLB cluster. Very scalable solution. Often used when multiple datacenters are approached active/actively and/or multi-homed (multiple ISP’s). Based on High Level Authorative DNS, for that requires its DNS name (space). All appliance actively participate within the configuration. A drawback could be that all appliances run stand alone, so configuration has to be identical on all appliances. Available from Enterprise Edition and up.

4. Cluster. Available since version 10. For me I think this kind of implementation uses a rather large footprint because of the demand of a dedicated network for cluster traffic and basically need for master node. This means that minimum recommend appliances is three whereas you actively use two. Requires separate license, not present in any edition.

5. VRRP. This solution is used a lot in active/passive (core) switch configurations. Since some time available on the Citrix NetScaler. Within this solution all appliances run standalone. The same IP’s are configured on multiple appliances but have a vrID assigned, the highest priority vrID is alive, should that one fail the second priority vrID comes alive. Advantage is that you can use all appliances that you buy, however you cannot load balance a resource over two active Citrix NetScaler appliances.

Be very aware of the VRRP type of implementations for two reasons:
- When using VRRP on a VPX you will have to configure the virtual switch in ‘’Promiscuous Mode’’ which makes it a hub. Network Admins will not be happy with you :-);
- When using VRRP and you have to load balance a solution like Microsoft Lync which requires a SSL pass-through configuration (SSL_Bridge), this will lead to asynchronous traffic. A solution would be to have the Lync server use the NetScaler as Gateway but this will not be feasible when the resource fails over to the other NetScaler appliance.

In my (humble) opinion I would rather see VRRP disappear as an option all together. I have not seen a workable solution based on VRRP yet.

Conclusion

As I stated earlier, I have no gain in customers buying one or the other. The outline above is purely based on my experience of advising Citrix NetScaler for years now. The choice of a Citrix NetScaler solutions may look complex but often is logical. Based on security compliance, business needs, datacenter locations, number of ISP’s etc.

So, this is it. I hope this has some value for you to make some decisions regarding which NetScaler hardware or virtual appliance and software editions to acquire.

About these ads

About Henny Louwers
I work as a Consultant specialized in Application Delivery, Virtualization of Servers, Desktops and Apps.

33 Responses to Choose your NetScaler … wisely

  1. Prince Cassius says:

    Another hugely informative article. I can’t agree more with the VPX. However, it behooves Citrix to bring down the price of the VPX for customers that want to get away from Secure Gateway.

    No one can take away the benefits of having a physical Network Appliance in comparison with a virtual one. However, I have personally deployed the VPX edition several times for smaller shops without issues. As such, I often recommend them for clients that just don’t have the budget. Not only because it is a great solution but because the benefits far out-weighs that of Secure Gateway

    Regards,
    Prince

    Like

    • Hi Prince,

      Thanks for the feedback. Yes, I agree. There is indeed no definitive answer. If the situations calls for it than VPX can be a fine solution. The fact remains that the VPX starts to get interesting as from the 1000Mbit (VPX 1000) version, from that version it simply doesn’t compete price-wise with the MPX 5550-5560 which has more advantages.

      So I agree on the fact that I think it would make sense for Citrix to bring the price of the VPX down. Especially when the VPX requires no hardware assembly. But I’ll bet the theory behind this has been pretty much thought out by smart (marketing) people! ;-)

      Regards,
      Henny

      Like

  2. Bas van Kaam says:

    Very nice Henny!

    Like

    • Thanks Bas!

      Like

  3. Thanks for a great article!

    I agree with a lot of your statements but as you know I love those little virtual appliances:). It indeed is amazing to see the small price difference between a VPX-1000 and a MPX5560. In that case I’d probably go MPX as well.
    The thing is that there is a huge price difference between the VPX-200 and VPX-1000 and that changes everything, for me at least. If we look at the non Marktplaats/Ebay like customer just doing some CAG / OWA / SharePoint 200 Mbit/s covers a whole amount of users.

    Point 2 is true, a lot of problems could potentially arise with sysadmins doing unintentional overcommitting. If we know that there could be a problem why not help them solve these issues instead of selling them a more expensive device then they would actually need?

    Like

    • Hi Barry,

      Thanks! :-)

      “If we look at the non Marktplaats/Ebay like customer just doing some CAG / OWA / SharePoint 200 Mbit/s covers a whole amount of users”

      The difficult thing is that you cannot put a hard number of users (or bandwidth) when you are publishing for instance SharePoint and portrait it as the magic number. Every company uses SharePoint (very) differently. They cannot be compared. Of course it could be possible that when the number of users (or applications) is right (low enough) a VPX version would suffice. A potential problem that could arise then is the limited growth capability (remember that the NetScaler is a swiss army knife and rapid wins in populairity once it has been installed), a customer would then have to spend money on an upgade (for instance VPX 1000) whereas it would’ve made more sense to buy an MPX in the first place.

      About overcommitting, it-is-not-always-a-bad-thing-to-overcommit. For instance XenDesktop or many other solutions that work perfectly fine when overcomitting. My point was contextual about positioning Citrix NetScaler VPX and I meet a lot of situations where they cannot guarantee enough resources for the number of users they’d like to service. If the situation calls for it I will do my best and help them understand ;-).

      Like

  4. Excellent article Henny – keep up the good work

    Like

  5. antal says:

    Nice post Henny, exactly the way we put it forward to customers as well.

    Like

  6. A useful post for many decision makers Henry – there’s a place in the market for the entry level VPX appliances but the performance of hardware always wins for our customers – particularly round the SSL capabilities….

    Like

  7. Pingback: Technology Short Take #34 - blog.scottlowe.org - The weblog of an IT pro specializing in virtualization, storage, and servers

  8. Pingback: Technology Short Take #34 | Strategic HR

  9. jonaiece says:

    Brilliant article. Especially helpful to those newbie in implementing ADCs. :) I wonder if you also have an article for us beginners. I am new in the netscaler world and it’s really challenging to cope up with the vast and edgy technology. :) thanks!

    Like

  10. Joy says:

    Saying this was helpful is an understatement cause, it was over helpful. In a new job and I have to evaluate the decisions made by our consultants on their design. They have proposed 2 MPX and 2 VPX. the MPX 7500 to sit in the perimeter network just for Access Gateway feature (which to me is definately an over kill), one at the main DC and the other at the Disaster Recovery Dc, while the VPX 1000 one at the Main DC in the internal network handling load balancing. Now I have argued with them on this and they came up with the response that my own internal people opted for the VPX cause of cause, by the way these are standard editions. Reading this article has confirmed and given me more heads up as to how to query the design. With my response as follows,, if we most do VPX in my organisation then they should opt for the SDX if not then replace the MPX 8500 with MPX 5560 and then also replace the VPX 1000 wit the MPX 7500 whioch i would rather suggest should be 8200 or 8400 which are upgradeable than 7500 which is (i assume.

    Thanks a lot henry am sure following u on tweeter right now.

    Like

  11. Alan Lantz says:

    Great article as I am trying to figure out which direction to replace an old AGEE (2000 series I think).. Anyway, I think for us with limited users will go virtual VPX with 200mb. We are scaling back the use of the physical appliance due to restructuring and just need to keep it around for some limited external access to XenApp desktops. Thanks for the info, very helpful.

    Like

  12. triblade says:

    Quote: “The first thing I would like to get off my chest is the following: Stop seeing/selling the Citrix NetScaler as a replacement for Secure Gateway.”

    How can I nót see the NetScaler as a replacement?? I do know it can do a lot more, but I don’t want that (to me) useless functionality!

    I only want a SSL to Citrix XenApp gateway, not a full blown SSL VPN replacement for my better Sophos UTM version.BTW, I’m talking about a 10 to 99 user base per customer. If a user want’s to have ‘easy’ Web Interface over SSL access I do not want to use VPN’s.

    Perhaps, if there is a better replacement for CSG out there I can stop seeing it as a replacement. I don’t mind paying for a product, but I do mind overpaying for something (read: large parts of something) I won’t use.

    For the rest of the article, I see how everyone always writes about (very) large customers. How about writing something for a lot more companies, like 10 to 150 users or something? There are a lot more companies out there that have a small user base and do use Citrix XenApp! (so with no special network admin etc)

    For large companies an interesting read though.

    Like

    • I understand your point. Especially since Citrix announced the Citrix NetScaler as the main platform for publishing Citrix Apps and Desktops and announced all other platforms EoL.

      And your right about not paying more then you actually need.

      Keep in mind that Citrix NetScaler VPX can still be a good solution for small to midsized companies. The blog is pretty much expressed from personal experience selling Citrix NetScaler and the decisions that are often made.

      You could also consider the NetScaler Gateway solution if the absolute only thing you need is a Citrix XenApp Gateway:

      http://www.citrix.com/products/netscaler-gateway/overview.html

      Like

      • triblade says:

        Thanks for the reply :-)

        I am trying the NetScaler Gateway right now in a VM testing environment. Still very complex atm when I’m used to CSG.

        I do get confused over naming with Citrix products. First the Citrix agent/client/off-online/receiver then Metaframe/Presentation Server/XenApp/XenDesktop Apps. And now everything is NetScaler in the networking area. At least NetScaler is one box with functionality turned on or off. (as far as I can get my head wrapped around it)

        When I got it working I will be back to read this article again ;-)

        Like

    • I’m with triblade on this one. Each year at IT strategy time, the question of “Do we keep XenApp 6.5 as a) our Office desktop solution and b) our remote/home working solution” is asked. We’re a medium size outfit with 300 users spread between three sites (two in UK, one in USA). For us, CSG is fine – let me re-iterate that – it’s fit for purpose.

      Because XenApp still struggles with multimedia/digital (which is where our business is heading) we’ve invested heavily in SCCM so can now manage our thick client estate much more easily. We could roll out every application to every laptop and PC. So the answer to (a) above now “we can probably replace”.

      That just leaves the remote/home working aspect for which XenApp is still IMO the best solution. It just works, the user experience is seamless and it means they can use their own equipment. But our requirement for a remote working solution is *way* less than the total 300 user base.

      So because Citrix Receiver 4 doesn’t, I believe, support Citrix Web Interface and therefore you have to use StoreFront – which doesn’t support CSG, we have to consider replacing CSG with NetScaler and StoreFront. That’s not a cheap option. I suspect we need 200MB (certainly more than 10MB) and probably Enterprise – not sure if we need a Netscaler at all three sites but if we do we’re looking here at $30,000. That’s an awful lot of money.

      Citrix are pricing themselves out of the market here IMO. $10k for a SINGLE software package is ludicrious IMO. We’ll be making our strategy decision in Spring next year and I get that feeling that this one will tip us over the edge and we’ll dump Citrix and go back to thick clients with direct access. Or maybe we can get away with Remote Desktop to a bank of Hyper-V VM. Yes, I know that’s a poorer solution but I look through that list of features in StoreFront and Netscaler and go “nope, don’t need that, or that, or that”. It will be *very* difficult for me to speak to finance and justify the cost. They’ll go “We get this for free now and Citrix want to now charge us $30k?”? Yes – that’ll go down well. They’ll ask us to look at alternatives.

      I could probably just about justify $1,000 per site for the CSG replacement.

      Rob.

      Like

      • Thanks for the reply Rob,

        You of course mention a very good and delicate point which we discuss at customers almost on a weekly basis. As a customer you pretty much have your back against the wall, I’ve seen some of the ‘other solutions’ and (as you mention) do not integrate very well with Citrix or users will have to make multiple steps to get to their resources. And yes, I would suspect Citrix of pushing certain configurations to ‘non-supported’ which helps getting competitors out of the way (vendor lock-in).

        Like

  13. But a very good article aside from that. I hadn’t absorbed it in full detail but the Netscaler Gateway caused me to go and have a look. Is this a replacement for CSG and can it be used with StoreFront? If so, then at $995 it’s a much more attractive solution

    Like

    • Yes, you can use this in conjunction with Citrix StoreFront. And if you think you would like to go NetScaler in a later timeframe you can always upgrade. The NetScaler Gateway is actually a NetScaler MPX 5500 series appliance which is upgradeable.

      Like

  14. Nice post Henny, exactly the way we put it forward to customers as well.

    Like

  15. James Taylor says:

    Brilliant article. particularly useful to those initiate in implementing ADCs. :) i’m wondering if you furthermore may have a writing for U.S. beginners. i’m new within the netscaler world and it’s very difficult to cope up with the Brobdingnagian and overstrung technology.

    Like

    • Thanks!

      Well, there is of course Citrix eDocs (http://support.citrix.com/proddocs/topic/netscaler/ns-gen-netscaler-wrapper-con.html) which are overwhelming on it’s own to say the least. http://www.netscalerkb.com has some very interesting posts and answers, and anyone can post a question of any level no problem.

      Like

  16. albertwt says:

    Which VPX appliance comes as the build in of Citrix Xendesktop Enterprise Edition ?

    Like

    • I maybe mistaken but as far as I know no Citrix NetScaler is included within Citrix Xendesktop Enterprise license. You can however purchase any NetScaler appliance and a Citrix platform license for 20.000 users will be free to download from within MyCitrix. Citrix XenApp/XenDesktop Platinum has a NetScaler Gateway concurrent user license for every XA/XD user for use with SSL/VPN, EPA, Portal page and/or SmartBased Access.

      Like

      • Ronald says:

        Customers having a Active Subscription for Xendesktop (enterprise) can deploy the Netscaler Gateway VPX which act as a replacement for the secure access gateway.

        Just install your Xendesktop license at the netscaler. and you ready to go.

        Like

  17. Andres Rangel says:

    Hello Henry,

    Do you know how licensing for the VPX works? I know you would not recommend it, but suppose I have a multi-tenant environment. Do I need to buy one VPX license per tenant?

    Thanks in advance

    Like

  18. antal says:

    Bit of info on pricing for the NetScaler Gateway as replacement for the Secure Gateway customers looking to move to the NetScaler platform. The NetScaler Gateway has a list price of $995 per instance and as Henny stated is a more secure solution then tunneling your traffic straight through like the CSG does. The NetScaler Gateway has a bandlimit of 50mb and supports hundreds of ICA proxy users concurrently. No further licences required. Should you wish to deploy SSL VPN or Smart Access, a concurrent Universal Access License (per user) is required. These are part of XA/XD Platinum or can be bought seperately. 5 are included with the VPX. Should you with to deploy a physical appliance for remote access purpose one can buy the NetScaler Gateway MPX 5500, this one supports 5000 concurrent ICA users at $9000 per appliance. HA requires 2 physical or virtual appliances.

    For a remote access solution I consider these options relatively cheap ( fyi I do work for Citrix) but indeed not free of charge.

    Consider consolidation and take the existing Junipers etc out of the network, use the appliance for your MDM solution etc.

    Like

  19. Sandeep says:

    Hi Henny,

    That’s an awesome post. Thank you for writing all these about NetScaler. Do i need to consider anything special for NetScaler with XenMobile and ShareFile?

    I mean i am really not sure how to size the Netscaler. Is there a way to calculate the bandwidth required? by using any kind of tool? Bandwidth needs to be considered but how much bandwidth must be considered? Let’s take office 2013, how much office bandwidth per user needs to be considered?

    In case of ShareFile, if 10 users are 10Mb file at a time he netscaler should habe the bandwidth capability of 10*10Mb=100Mb as throughput?

    In case of XA/XD when a user is logged in how much bandwidth needs to be considered for him with 10 applications?

    Please help me with info on these things.

    Thanks,

    Like

  20. Davis Cruz says:

    Excellent Henry. This is commendable article.

    Like

  21. pctechgo says:

    Hi Henry,
    What is involved with upgrading a Standard license to Enterprise on a Netscaler MPX 8200. How difficult is it and what are the gochas or things to look out for? Thank you for any advice you post in regards to upgrading.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hi,

      First create a backup of the total /nsconfig on all appliances before making changes using WinSCP.

      You can just add the license through the console (System => Licenses), or upload through WinSCP to /nsconfig/license (on both appliances).

      A reboot of the appliances will be required to activate the newly added license.

      Remember that the licenses are cumulative, meaning features will be added by inventorying the licenses on booting.

      After a successful upload of the Enterprise license you (optionally) remove the Standard Edition license. This is not a necessity.

      Liked by 1 person

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 45 other followers

%d bloggers like this: