|
5/19/2011 8:01:23 PM
|
Mase
Posts 5
|
Good day all! I stumbled across your product quite some time ago and instantly fell in love with its ability to fire a function following a reconnection. We have been using this for over a year to allow us to "Force logoff" a user who has ReconnActed to the server. However, we recently began re-installing our servers with 2003 Server x64 whereas they were originally x32. Since upgrading to x64 we have not been able to get ReconnAct to work properly. The process fires and shows in task manager, but when someone reconnects it allows it and does not execute the reconnact. Below is how we are using it. Please advise!
The All users startup has a batch file called reconnact.bat which executes the following upon everyone logging in:
@START C:\smart2k\bin\reconnact.exe -d C:\smart2k\bin\forcelogoff.bat -r C:\smart2k\bin\forcelogoff.bat
:done
The forcelogoff.bat command contains the following which forces the user to logoff. This batch file works perfectly when executed directly.
C:\windows\SYSTEM32\shutdown.exe /l /f
:done
|
|
5/19/2011 8:02:24 PM
|
Mase
Posts 5
|
I don't know if it is relavent or not but these are 2003 R2 Standard x64 servers running SP2.
Thanks!
|
|
5/20/2011 9:27:35 AM
|
Arnout Grootveld — Immidio
Posts 269
|
Mase,
Is it just the reconnecting that doesn't fire the logoff script, or is the disconnect trigger also ignored? If it's just reconnecting that fails: the reconnect action is only performed if the user connects from a different system, unless you specify the -a argument, in which case it's performed whenever a reconnect occurs. Could that explain the behaviour you're seeing?
--
Arnout.
|
|
5/20/2011 4:41:03 PM
|
Mase
Posts 5
|
Arnout,
Unfortunately it was not triggering for a disconnect or a reconnect. I additionally tried it with just the -l switch and the ReconnAct program would launch but not execute the batch. At this time we have terminated our use of ReconnAct as I was able to solve the problem by allowing clients to login more than once and then scripting the logoff of more than 1 logon. I also stumbled across a registry change which allowed me to force the immediate logoff of any clients that disconnect. This solves our problem at this point. Thank you for writing back and I will keep an eye out for any further correspondence.
Thanks again!
Mase
|
|
5/20/2011 8:16:36 PM
|
Arnout Grootveld — Immidio
Posts 269
|
Mase,
The -l argument not launching is very strange behaviour indeed...
I don't have a 2003 x64 box handy to play with right now, but I'll take a look early next week. Glad to hear that you've found an alternative solution, but I want to figure out what's going on here.
--
Arnout.
|
|
5/20/2011 8:43:54 PM
|
Mase
Posts 5
|
I understand. If I can be of any assistance just let me know. Have a great weekend!
|
|
5/20/2011 9:41:52 PM
|
Arnout Grootveld — Immidio
Posts 269
|
Mase,
I just created a VM with 2003 x64 R2 (SP2, but no hotfixes applied -- that would have taken longer than downloading the ISO's from MSDN and installing them :-)
I put ReconnAct.exe (version 1.4.1.0, x86 binary) into C:\smart2k\bin, and dropped a ReconnAct.bat into All Users' Startup folder, with the following contents
@START C:\smart2k\bin\reconnact.exe -d C:\smart2k\bin\d.bat -r C:\smart2k\bin\r.bat -l C:\smart2k\bin\l.bat -a
:done
The three .bat files each just add a line to a log file ("disconnect", "reconnect", and "launch", respectively).
RDP'ing to the box leads to "launch", disconnecting the session adds "disconnect", and reconnecting results in "reconnect". In other words, everything works as intended...
If you'd want to further investigate what's going on in your environment, I would suggest running ProcMon in another session to see what's going on with the batch files. But, since you already found another solution, we can also just leave it at this, of course.
--
Arnout.
|
|
5/20/2011 10:01:09 PM
|
Mase
Posts 5
|
Sounds good Arnout. I wasn't completely willing to rule out my environment as the cause but knew we simply installed x64 versus x32. At this time my new solution appears to be working winningly so I am going to let it ride for now. Thank you again for your support and I apologize for your having to do all this to test.
|
|
5/20/2011 10:22:53 PM
|
Arnout Grootveld — Immidio
Posts 269
|
No problem -- I just wanted to make sure it was working as it should (and by now I can confirm that it also works on a fully updated 2003 R2 install -- getting and installing those 105 updates wasn't as slow as I expected, but still :-)
--
Arnout.
|
|
pages:
1 |
|---|