Two-Tier Versus Three-Tier SBC Architectures, from BriForum 2007

Historically speaking, server-based computing solutions have utilized the two-tier architecture of a standard client/server implementation.

This is a video of a breakout session from BriForum 2007, presented by Dan Shappir.

Session Description: Historically speaking, server-based computing solutions have utilized the two-tier architecture of a standard client/server implementation. (This is how Citrix Presentation Server works.)

However, in recent years an alternative three-tier architecture for SBC has emerged. This is the architecture that has been implemented in products such as Ericom PowerTerm WebConnect and Jetro CockpIT. (In the three-tier architecture, the access broker is separated to a distinct tier from the Terminal Server itself, and a single broker can be used with many Terminal Servers.)

Where this gets interesting is that the three-tier architecture is also utilized by VDI solutions such as Citrix’s Project Trinity and Provision Networks' Virtual Access Suite.

In this presentation, the implications of both architectures will be analyzed as they apply to aspects such as scalability, performance, and reliability. This analysis will be performed using data from real case studies. Selecting the appropriate SBC solution for a particular implementation can be a very complicated process. In particular the differences in architecture between various solutions can have profound implications with regard to how applicable they are, and the benefits they will provide. This presentation will provide information derived from real world data that will enable participates to understand the consequences of this fundamental architectural distinction

Start the conversation

Send me notifications when other members comment.

Please create a username to comment.

-ADS BY GOOGLE

SearchVirtualDesktop

SearchEnterpriseDesktop

SearchServerVirtualization

SearchVMware

Close