By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,963 Members | 941 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,963 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Does Access Internet Synchronization only need one server with fixedIP?

P: n/a
I am starting to study internet synchronization, and my head is still
spinning since internet is not my forte, however my boss is breathing
down my neck at the moment. Our company has only one server with fixed
IP address provided by our ISP, while the other sites (which I wish in
the future hold the replicas databases) have only standard internet
connections with Dynamic IP (which means that they change IP
addresses, as given by the ISP every time we connect to the ISP, which
is a lot cheaper than the fixed IP address connection here). My quick
and fast understanding of reading what I can at the moment about
Internet synchronization, seems to tell me that this is OK. All I need
is one fixed IP server, and other replicas made from the database in
that server can connect with standard internet connection to
synchronize (though I still need to understand how this internet
synchronization works fully).

Am I correct to understand that? That is, for internet
synchronization, all is needed is a single fixed IP server, and the
other replicas can connect to the internet using standard connection
(Dynamic IP/non fixed IP) anywhere and still can synchronize properly
with the database in the fixed IP server? Is that why it is called
anonymous replicas? Any down side on that one?

Thank you so much
Sep 2 '08 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
15 Replies


P: n/a
Sorry, you been confused by the name of this newsgroup! The "access" here
refers not to Internet access, but rather to Microsoft's Access, which is a
relational database development program.

You need to find a forum/newsgroup more appropriate to your problem.

Good luck!

--
There's ALWAYS more than one way to skin a cat!

Answers/posts based on Access 2000/2003

Message posted via AccessMonster.com
http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/For...ccess/200809/1

Sep 2 '08 #2

P: n/a
in****@gmail.com wrote in
news:ce**********************************@b2g2000p rf.googlegroups.com
:
I am starting to study internet synchronization, and my head is
still spinning since internet is not my forte, however my boss is
breathing down my neck at the moment. Our company has only one
server with fixed IP address provided by our ISP,
Stop right there. Internet Replication requires the Internet
synchronizer to run on the web server to work (and it has to be IIS,
BTW). I don't know of any ISP that's going to allow that. This is
one of the many reasons why I have always recommended against using
Internet Replication -- it introduces too many outside dependencies,
and one of those dependencies is on the worst web server ever (i.e.,
IIS).
while the other sites (which I wish in
the future hold the replicas databases) have only standard
internet connections with Dynamic IP (which means that they change
IP addresses, as given by the ISP every time we connect to the
ISP, which is a lot cheaper than the fixed IP address connection
here). My quick and fast understanding of reading what I can at
the moment about Internet synchronization, seems to tell me that
this is OK.
Yes, if you have a web server with a fixed IP address that is
running Windows and IIS and you have permission to run an executable
on it (i.e., the Internet synchronizer), then, yes, it can be done
that way. IIS doesn't need to be running on the remote PCs, nor do
they need fixed IP addresses.
All I need
is one fixed IP server, and other replicas made from the database
in that server can connect with standard internet connection to
synchronize (though I still need to understand how this internet
synchronization works fully).

Am I correct to understand that? That is, for internet
synchronization, all is needed is a single fixed IP server, and
the other replicas can connect to the internet using standard
connection (Dynamic IP/non fixed IP) anywhere and still can
synchronize properly with the database in the fixed IP server?
This is correct.
Is that why it is called
anonymous replicas? Any down side on that one?
Anonymous replicas have zilch to do with Internet replication. They
were introduced in Jet 4, and Internet replication predates that.

But you don't want to use anonymous replicas, anyway, as they are
just a terrible idea:

http://trigeminal.com/usenet/usenet027.asp?1033

You should really familiarize yourself with everything on that
website relating to replication before you commit to anything at
all.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Sep 2 '08 #3

P: n/a
"Linq Adams via AccessMonster.com" <u28780@uwewrote in
news:899937d75c4ab@uwe:
Sorry, you been confused by the name of this newsgroup! The
"access" here refers not to Internet access, but rather to
Microsoft's Access, which is a relational database development
program.

You need to find a forum/newsgroup more appropriate to your
problem.
I think you are showing that you don't know everything there is to
know about Access, as the question was about Internet Replication,
which Jet has supported since at least Jet 3.5.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Sep 2 '08 #4

P: n/a
Dear David,
Thank you for the help. I understand your concern, and I am trying to
go through your Jet Replication Wiki right now, with all the
recommended readings. My problem is that it seems that my hands are
tied. We live in a country where the internet connection is far from
being reliable. Though it is supposed to have 1Mbps speed, at times it
simply does not want to work at all. At the same time, we have a few
sites together. We need to consolidate the data and at the moment, it
is a nightmare. I have considered web application, but that will be
hell during the low speed connection. So, the idea I can do is to
change our main server (currently running on Windows Server 2003) to
be a temporary web server, and synchonized all the databases on all
sites during the good speed connection time, say midnight, daily. I
thought I only need a fix IP address to change that server to become a
web server. Am I wrong to think that?

If you have better suggestion, I would love to hear from you. My
company is also too small to spend too much on expensive software or
hardware.

Again, thank you so much for your help.

Best Regards,
Indra
Sep 3 '08 #5

P: n/a
in****@gmail.com wrote in
news:38**********************************@d77g2000 hsb.googlegroups.co
m:
Thank you for the help. I understand your concern, and I am trying
to go through your Jet Replication Wiki right now, with all the
recommended readings. My problem is that it seems that my hands
are tied. We live in a country where the internet connection is
far from being reliable. Though it is supposed to have 1Mbps
speed, at times it simply does not want to work at all. At the
same time, we have a few sites together. We need to consolidate
the data and at the moment, it is a nightmare.
There are two alternatives to Internet replication:

1. indirect replication (over a VPN over the Internet)

2. app hosted on Windows Terminal Server so Jet replication is not
required at all.

I vastly prefer choice #2, though I've more than a decade of
experience implementing #1.
I have considered web application, but that will be
hell during the low speed connection. So, the idea I can do is to
change our main server (currently running on Windows Server 2003)
to be a temporary web server, and synchonized all the databases on
all sites during the good speed connection time, say midnight,
daily. I thought I only need a fix IP address to change that
server to become a web server. Am I wrong to think that?
Well, you need to have port 80 wide open to the Internet, and that's
a major problem. It's simply not safe.

Since you have Windows Server 2003, I'd strongly suggest you just
get the client licenses and host the app on Windows Terminal Server
on that machine. You might want to spend a little money on upping
the RAM in the server, but RAM is pretty inexpensive these days.
If you have better suggestion, I would love to hear from you. My
company is also too small to spend too much on expensive software
or hardware.
You can't run a distributed app without spending money on it, unless
your data is worthless.

In your situation, I'd certainly recommend Windows Terminal Server.

Failing that, I'd recommend setting up a VPN and using indirect
replication, with your server as your central synchronization hub.

But, again, WTS would be far, far easier, and likely cheaper in the
long run (in terms of labor and maintenance), as well as being much
more robust and reliable.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Sep 3 '08 #6

P: n/a
Thank you once again, I will try to look into VPN. May I know what
does it stand for? I remember something about indirect replication
when I scan quickly your wiki, I am still going through it slowly to
fully understand it, but I have not got to indirect replication yet.
Is it explained there as well? Any good recommended sites to read?

As I mentioned earlier, though I am keen on the web app, our main
concern is that our internet traffic are so unreliable here. While
intra-site data processing are needed to be quick, our inter-sites
updates can wait for a day or two. And, to add extra prespective too,
labour cost here (including mine) are way lower than in US, by the
way. An average programmer here earns US$2500/year (but our cost of
living are lower too, of course). Not that I am complaining, but just
to show you the reasons why somethings are done the way it is.

Thank you so much.

Best Regards,
Indra

On Sep 4, 4:48*am, "David W. Fenton" <XXXuse...@dfenton.com.invalid>
wrote:
ing...@gmail.com wrote innews:38**********************************@d77g20 00hsb.googlegroups.co
m:
Thank you for the help. I understand your concern, and I am trying
to go through your Jet Replication Wiki right now, with all the
recommended readings. My problem is that it seems that my hands
are tied. We live in a country where the internet connection is
far from being reliable. Though it is supposed to have 1Mbps
speed, at times it simply does not want to work at all. At the
same time, we have a few sites together. We need to consolidate
the data and at the moment, it is a nightmare.

There are two alternatives to Internet replication:

1. indirect replication (over a VPN over the Internet)

2. app hosted on Windows Terminal Server so Jet replication is not
required at all.

I vastly prefer choice #2, though I've more than a decade of
experience implementing #1.
I have considered web application, but that will be
hell during the low speed connection. So, the idea I can do is to
change our main server (currently running on Windows Server 2003)
to be a temporary web server, and synchonized all the databases on
all sites during the good speed connection time, say midnight,
daily. I thought I only need a fix IP address to change that
server to become a web server. Am I wrong to think that?

Well, you need to have port 80 wide open to the Internet, and that's
a major problem. It's simply not safe.

Since you have Windows Server 2003, I'd strongly suggest you just
get the client licenses and host the app on Windows Terminal Server
on that machine. You might want to spend a little money on upping
the RAM in the server, but RAM is pretty inexpensive these days.
If you have better suggestion, I would love to hear from you. My
company is also too small to spend too much on expensive software
or hardware.

You can't run a distributed app without spending money on it, unless
your data is worthless.

In your situation, I'd certainly recommend Windows Terminal Server.

Failing that, I'd recommend setting up a VPN and using indirect
replication, with your server as your central synchronization hub.

But, again, WTS would be far, far easier, and likely cheaper in the
long run (in terms of labor and maintenance), as well as being much
more robust and reliable.

--
David W. Fenton * * * * * * * * *http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com * *http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Sep 3 '08 #7

P: n/a
OK, I found out what VPN is:Virtual Private Network, need to study
more into it. My other questions stilll stand, especially regarding
other reading materials about indirect replication. Thank you so much
Sep 4 '08 #8

P: n/a
OK, I found out what VPN is:Virtual Private Network, need to study
more into it. My other questions stilll stand, especially regarding
other reading materials about indirect replication. Thank you so much
Sep 4 '08 #9

P: n/a
in****@gmail.com wrote in
news:28**********************************@n33g2000 pri.googlegroups.co
m:
Thank you once again, I will try to look into VPN. May I know what
does it stand for?
A VPN is a Virtual Private Network. It creates an encrypted tunnel
across the Internet that is invisible to anyone not connected the
VPN (or its affliated networks). When you're connected to a VPN
across the Internet you have the exact same access that you would if
your were connected to the LAN at the end point of your VPN (just
slower, since it has to go across the Internet).
I remember something about indirect replication
when I scan quickly your wiki, I am still going through it slowly
to fully understand it, but I have not got to indirect replication
yet. Is it explained there as well? Any good recommended sites to
read?
You should start with the Microsoft White Papers, and Replication
FAQs, I think. The stuff on the Wiki is more practical suggestions
as to how to implement it. You still need the overview before that
stuff will make much sense.
As I mentioned earlier, though I am keen on the web app, our main
concern is that our internet traffic are so unreliable here. While
intra-site data processing are needed to be quick, our inter-sites
updates can wait for a day or two.
I don't know what you mean here. Both Internet replication and
indirect replication are perfect for synchronizing across
high-latency networks, because they don't depend on opening the
remote replica across the network connection (which is both slow and
disastrously dangerous).
And, to add extra prespective too,
labour cost here (including mine) are way lower than in US, by the
way. An average programmer here earns US$2500/year (but our cost
of living are lower too, of course). Not that I am complaining,
but just to show you the reasons why somethings are done the way
it is.
But surely it's all relative -- that the labor cost is low does not
mean that relative to the other costs it won't be a high expense.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Sep 4 '08 #10

P: n/a
OK, thank you so much again. I will try to learn all that first for
now. Much appreciated.

Just to explain a bit more about labour cost. Well, it does make a
difference, because cost of materials (including computers,
international softwares) are still global price. For example, in the
factory that I work in, the total labour cost amounts to only 3% of
total cost. A friend of mine from United States told me that over
there, for exactly the same industry, the labour cost amounts to 35%
of the total cost. Hence, in a place like US, purchasing material will
need to consider the impact of the labour cost, while in our country,
though it is taken into consideration, it has much less of an impact.
Sadly, for some of us.

Anyway, again, I really appreciate all the help. Thank you so very much
Sep 4 '08 #11

P: n/a
in****@gmail.com wrote in
news:b1**********************************@a1g2000h sb.googlegroups.com
:
Just to explain a bit more about labour cost. Well, it does make a
difference, because cost of materials (including computers,
international softwares) are still global price. For example, in
the factory that I work in, the total labour cost amounts to only
3% of total cost. A friend of mine from United States told me that
over there, for exactly the same industry, the labour cost amounts
to 35% of the total cost. Hence, in a place like US, purchasing
material will need to consider the impact of the labour cost,
while in our country, though it is taken into consideration, it
has much less of an impact. Sadly, for some of us.
Are you considering long-term maintenance? Jet replication is very
picky and needs constant care, whereas with Windows Terminal Server,
it's all centralized in one place.

Secondly, in regard to hardware:

If you've already got a Windows server (2000 or 2003) then all you
need to make it into a Windows Terminal Server is the licenses
(which sell for c. $40 ea. in the US) and sufficient RAM (I would
want 128MBs for each simultaneous user). Bandwidth is not
necessarily a huge consideration, as WTS can work well even over
dialup if you tune your Remote Desktop session properly.

In other words, most of the hardware you need may already be in
place, and all that might be needed would be the CALs and some extra
RAM.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Sep 5 '08 #12

P: n/a
Wait a minute! I might be missing something here. My background is in
Chemical Engineering, and learnt computer basically by self-taught, so
please be patient with me. I have a misunderstanding of what you mean
by Windows Terminal Server, as I thought you meant Web-base App. I
have a read of it on the Wikipedia, and I realise that I misunderstood
you. Do you basically mean making a common Windows application (such
as the Windows form front-end application I usually made in VB 2005
with Access back-end), and having it run from the Windows 2003 server,
and accessing it through internet using Remote Desktop Connection? I
have never done anything of this before, and I don't even know that it
is possible. If it can, then it is very attractive indeed. Especially
if it does not need too wide of a bandwidth. Does it need a static IP?

If it can work that way, then it is only about what is already
available and whatever it will cost to change it. Which I need to
check on Monday.
Sep 6 '08 #13

P: n/a
Hi, I thought I should at least inform you that our company finally
decided to go the way you suggested, that is using Terminal Server via
internet. I like to thank you for all the insights and the patience
that you have given me. Especially, after I reread my questions and
answers, they do sound rather like dumb questions. I am sorry for
that. I was never familiar with internet/network technology, as I am
usually a VB with Access programmer, mainly for the use with peer-to-
peer connection. I also apologize for the late reply, as I want to
make sure the final decision of the company first, before I write
this.

Once, again thank you so much for your kind help and patience. Much
appreciated.

The next time if you pass through Indonesia, by any chance, please let
me know, I will try my best to repay the favour, :).

Best Regards,
Indra
Oct 5 '08 #14

P: n/a
in****@gmail.com wrote:
>Hi, I thought I should at least inform you that our company finally
decided to go the way you suggested, that is using Terminal Server via
internet. I like to thank you for all the insights and the patience
that you have given me. Especially, after I reread my questions and
answers, they do sound rather like dumb questions. I am sorry for
that. I was never familiar with internet/network technology, as I am
usually a VB with Access programmer, mainly for the use with peer-to-
peer connection.
Nothing to apologize for. All questions sounds dumb after you get the answer.
<smile>

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
Oct 5 '08 #15

P: n/a
Dear David,
I just want to let you know that our company finally adopts your
suggestion, that is to use terminal server. I like to thank you
personally for all your suggestions and patience. I have reread my
posts, and they do sound rather dumb, once I understand a bit more
about terminal server and VPN. I am sorry about that, I am not usually
known as dumb, :), but I really have next to nothing experience with
network/internet side programming. My background mainly in programming
VB to access MS Access, mainly for peer-to-peer connection. Besides, I
learnt everything about programming by selftaught, hence many parts
are pretty spotty, for areas that I never learnt. I am a Chemical
Engineer by training.

Again, thank you so much for your patience and help. This is a reply
after a long time, because I want to wait until my company makes the
decision. Much appreciated. The next time you pass through Indonesia,
please let me know, and I would really like to take the opportunity to
return the favour.

Best Regards,
Indra
Oct 5 '08 #16

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.