Dear List,
Does anyone know of any advantages from installing a hardware ssh (or crypto) accelleration device on a server machine running x2go? For example I've tried to tweak my SSH server but despite some improvements in responsiveness video playback (I tried a youtube video) is still choppy.
Would a device like that help or does x2go's design not allow it to benefit from such an enhancement?
I'm using my x2go client from a remote location using wifi and not in a LAN.
Regards, Dimitris
Hi,
no, definitely not. These hardware accelerators usually just take over the CPU consuming public key encryption at the beginning of a connection when keys are exchanged. You can use that hardware if you have issues with CPU load. But it doesn't speed up the data being sent after the connection is established. The bottleneck is the bandwidth of your internet connection and that cannot be upgraded through purchasing such a "magical device". :o) Video is probably even choppy if you connect through LAN - better forget about it and play it locally :)
Jörg
Am Mittwoch, den 22.09.2010, 21:56 -0600 schrieb Dimitris Anogiatis:
Dear List,
Does anyone know of any advantages from installing a hardware ssh (or crypto) accelleration device on a server machine running x2go? For example I've tried to tweak my SSH server but despite some improvements in responsiveness video playback (I tried a youtube video) is still choppy.
Would a device like that help or does x2go's design not allow it to benefit from such an enhancement?
I'm using my x2go client from a remote location using wifi and not in a LAN.
Regards, Dimitris
X2go-dev mailing list X2go-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/x2go-dev
Hi Dimitris
On Do 23 Sep 2010 05:56:24 CEST Dimitris Anogiatis wrote:
Does anyone know of any advantages from installing a hardware ssh (or crypto) accelleration device on a server machine running x2go? For example I've tried to tweak my SSH server but despite some improvements in responsiveness video playback (I tried a youtube video) is still choppy.
NoMachine has announced that NXv4 will have support for videos,
animations etc. If X2go continues using NX libraries and the NX video
stuff will be released as GPL then there probably is a chance of being
able to use animated graphics in the near(?) future. I guess that
NXing video streams will be quite CPU intensive, though. So this will
probably not be suitable for terminal servers.
However, if you can play a video file locally then you should prefer that!!! (there is no real need to X2go-tunnel Youtube, is it?)
Best, mike
--
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM mike gabriel, dorfstr. 27, 24245 barmissen fon: +49 (4302) 281418, fax: +49 (4302) 281419
mail: m.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de
freeBusy: https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-netzwerkteam.de.xf...
Hey Mike,
No at the moment there is no immediate need to x2go-tunnel youtube movies. I was just wondering if there's any real benefit from speeding up ssh connections and whether crypto accelerators might have an effect overall before I go buy one and test it myself (no need forkin over money for a card that won't be of any use to me).
Regarding the local video playback is it possible to embed it in the client window? or would you recommend opening a different mplayer window for example?
Regards, Dimitris
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:04 AM, Mike Gabriel <m.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de
wrote:
Hi Dimitris
On Do 23 Sep 2010 05:56:24 CEST Dimitris Anogiatis wrote:
Does anyone know of any advantages from installing a hardware ssh (or
crypto) accelleration device on a server machine running x2go? For example I've tried to tweak my SSH server but despite some improvements in responsiveness video playback (I tried a youtube video) is still choppy.
NoMachine has announced that NXv4 will have support for videos, animations etc. If X2go continues using NX libraries and the NX video stuff will be released as GPL then there probably is a chance of being able to use animated graphics in the near(?) future. I guess that NXing video streams will be quite CPU intensive, though. So this will probably not be suitable for terminal servers.
However, if you can play a video file locally then you should prefer that!!! (there is no real need to X2go-tunnel Youtube, is it?)
Best, mike
--
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM mike gabriel, dorfstr. 27, 24245 barmissen fon: +49 (4302) 281418, fax: +49 (4302) 281419
mail: m.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de
freeBusy:
https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-netzwerkteam.de.xf...
Hi Dimitris,
On Do 23 Sep 2010 15:58:26 CEST Dimitris Anogiatis wrote:
Regarding the local video playback is it possible to embed it in the client window? or would you recommend opening a different mplayer window for example?
One dream I have for thin clients is the possility to launch
applications locally on the thin client and use data resources from
the terminal server (home directories, config files etc.). But,
unfortunately, up to now, this is all dreaming...
So the answer might be: Launch X2go as one application window, launch
a Videoplayer like VLC oder MPlayer as a second independent
application window... To me, there is no need to embed a player
application into the X2go client, but maybe I misunderstand your
question...
Best, Mike
--
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM mike gabriel, dorfstr. 27, 24245 barmissen fon: +49 (4302) 281418, fax: +49 (4302) 281419
mail: m.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de
freeBusy: https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-netzwerkteam.de.xf...
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 13:04 +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote: <snip>
For example I've tried to tweak my SSH server but despite some improvements in responsiveness video playback (I tried a youtube video) is still choppy.
NoMachine has announced that NXv4 will have support for videos,
animations etc. If X2go continues using NX libraries and the NX video
stuff will be released as GPL then there probably is a chance of being
able to use animated graphics in the near(?) future. I guess that
NXing video streams will be quite CPU intensive, though. So this will
probably not be suitable for terminal servers.However, if you can play a video file locally then you should prefer that!!! (there is no real need to X2go-tunnel Youtube, is it?) <snip> Actually, we do see a need. When replacing physical desktops with virtual ones, users don't relish jumping back and forth. Being able to do all things from one desktop is important from a user perspective.
We are also seeing video becoming more important in educational settings. X2Go seems ideal for schools but a frequent stumbling block in our presentations to date has been handling video.
The actual video handling libraries seem to be out of scope of X2Go as it just uses the NX libraries but is anyone familiar with HP's RGS (http://h20331.www2.hp.com/hpsub/cache/286504-0-0-225-121.html)? It seems to vary the compression method used based upon what it is transmitting thus it handles video differently from, say, text. I have never used it and have no idea how it works but, unlike SPICE, it is being presented as a WAN friendly protocol. Thanks - John
One possible solution:
- use PXE boot for your thin clients, mounting everything over the network.
- in local GNOME, run only a bottom panel with menu for apps that needs to be run locally.
- On the remote GNOME, run only a top panel.
Now, instead of running a complete GNOME session, simply run gnome-panel from x2go. That way, you'll have a "mixed-mode" session so that users feel like they're doing everything on the same machine, when in fact they're not.
It is a work-around, but it felt quite nice here.
Jo-Erlend Schinstad
Hi Jo-Erlend,
On Do 23 Sep 2010 18:01:31 CEST Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote:
One possible solution:
- use PXE boot for your thin clients, mounting everything over the network.
- in local GNOME, run only a bottom panel with menu for apps that needs to be run locally.
- On the remote GNOME, run only a top panel.
Now, instead of running a complete GNOME session, simply run gnome-panel from x2go. That way, you'll have a "mixed-mode" session so that users feel like they're doing everything on the same machine, when in fact they're not.
It is a work-around, but it felt quite nice here.
NICE!!!! I will keep that in the back of my mind... (I am currently
working on an X2go integration into LTSP thinclients...
Regards, Mike
--
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM mike gabriel, dorfstr. 27, 24245 barmissen fon: +49 (4302) 281418, fax: +49 (4302) 281419
mail: m.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de
freeBusy: https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-netzwerkteam.de.xf...
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 06:39:41PM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
On Do 23 Sep 2010 18:01:31 CEST Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote:
One possible solution:
- use PXE boot for your thin clients, mounting everything over the network.
- in local GNOME, run only a bottom panel with menu for apps that needs to be run locally.
- On the remote GNOME, run only a top panel.
Now, instead of running a complete GNOME session, simply run gnome-panel from x2go. That way, you'll have a "mixed-mode" session so that users feel like they're doing everything on the same machine, when in fact they're not.
It is a work-around, but it felt quite nice here.
NICE!!!! I will keep that in the back of my mind... (I am currently
working on an X2go integration into LTSP thinclients...
The LTSP project provides the ltsp-localapps wrapper. If you are using LTSP terminals exclusively[1], you could edit the menu on the server to use the wrapper for some applications. This could be a simpler setup than the "mixed-mode" approach and would work with other desktop environments as well.
How do you want to integrate X2go into LTSP? It could be nice to add something NX based as transport alternative to XDMCP and SSH. :-)
Best regards, Erik
[1] Otherwise you would have to used different menu entries for terminal users than for local/workstation users, which tends to confuse people.
Dipl.-Inform. Erik Auerswald http://www.fg-networking.de/ auerswald@fg-networking.de Tel: +49-631-4149988-0 Fax: +49-631-4149988-9
Gesellschaft für Fundamental Generic Networking mbH Geschäftsführung: Volker Bauer, Jörg Mayer Gerichtsstand: Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern - HRB: 3630
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 18:01 +0200, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote:
One possible solution:
- use PXE boot for your thin clients, mounting everything over the network.
- in local GNOME, run only a bottom panel with menu for apps that needs to be run locally.
- On the remote GNOME, run only a top panel.
Now, instead of running a complete GNOME session, simply run gnome-panel from x2go. That way, you'll have a "mixed-mode" session so that users feel like they're doing everything on the same machine, when in fact they're not.
It is a work-around, but it felt quite nice here. <snip> That's a really neat idea. We do something similar to provide seamless Windows applications for our remote desktops using seamlessRDP but I never thought of actually delivering the remote desktop itself that way. It would probably work for our Windows users, too.
I have to think about the dangers of user error when it comes to data storage. In our seamlessRDP environment, both the Windows applications and the X2Go applications are pointing to the same data store. That would not be the case in this scenario. The applications should keep things straight but I'm concerned about them using the wrong file manager and getting very confused. Have to think it through but thanks for a creative solution - John
-
Dimitris Anogiatis -
Erik Auerswald -
Jo-Erlend Schinstad -
John A. Sullivan III -
Jörg Sawatzki -
Mike Gabriel