Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for RDS Gateways #29

Open
BusiPlay opened this issue Nov 18, 2019 · 5 comments
Open

Add support for RDS Gateways #29

BusiPlay opened this issue Nov 18, 2019 · 5 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@BusiPlay
Copy link

Currently, the IAP Plugin only allows direct connection through IAP directly to a Host. We would like to configure an Connection Broker, and have the client connect to the broker via RDS Gateway. Configuration would need to specify that gateway connection should use IAP.

@jpassing
Copy link
Collaborator

If I understand correctly, the idea would be to combine IAP and RDGW:

[ Client ] --> [ IAP ] --> [ RD Gateway ] --> [ RD Connection Broker or regular VM ]

And presumably, the plugin should pick up the Gateway settings of the RDCMan configuration to establish this connection?

Is this what you have in mind? If yes, I'll have a look.

@BusiPlay
Copy link
Author

Yes, that's exactly right. Thank you!

@taoszhanna
Copy link

Yes. We would like to see this as well.

@taoszhanna
Copy link

I would think this would be running multiple RDS gateways in a MIG behind an ILB. Then fronting the ILB/GCLB with IAP.

@jpassing
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for following up on this. There are 2 challenges with RD GW-over-IAP which so far have kept me from implementing support for RD GWs:

  1. IAP TCP forwarding only works for individual VMs, not for ILBs. This might change in the future, but at least for now it means that you'd only be able to create a tunnel to an individual RD GW, but not to a RD GW farm.
  2. By default, he RDP control refuses connections to an RD GW if the common name of the gateway's RDP certificate does not match the server name used to establish the connection. The issue here is that when you establish a connection via IAP, then the server name is always 127.0.0.1 -- which is almost certainly different than the gateway's name. I'd have to do more research to see if this can be worked around.

How severe of a limitation do you think (1) is?

If you have additional context that you'd like to discuss privately, it might be good to file a Support request.

@jpassing jpassing added the enhancement New feature or request label May 13, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants