Talk:Remote Desktop Protocol

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Remote Desktop Protocol article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Windows: Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

me_and (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection. (declared here)

Back Orifice peer review[edit]

We are having a peer review for remote administration tool Back Orifice. We're hoping that you could join the discussion and give us some ideas, how to improve the article further. --Easyas12c 19:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Difference?[edit]

Apart from the lack of Remote Desktop, what other differences are there in Home and Professional editions? --Tenryuu 21:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disadvantages(?!)[edit]

I fail to see how RDP not being in Windows XP Home is a "disadvantage" of the RDP protocol itself? Therefore I renamed "Disadvantages" to "Supported Operating Systems". It also might be interesting to note the differences between RDP and ICA... or even VNC. Urbanriot 18:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually XP Home does contain an RDP server but it can only be accessed via the Remote Assistance feature. Windows 2000 Server also contains an RDP server, of course, but the Terminal Services client is not installed by default. Windows 2000 Professional does not provide an RDP client. --80.175.250.218 09:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But Windows 2000 pro can run an RDP client, and has an unlimited client license for using it. Crocodealer 06:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wouldn't it be useful to have a clear definition of exactly what we mean by client and what we mean with server - perhaps even with a little diagram? In fact, the proper terminology in this network mamagement context is "manager" and "agent". I think that any description of the feature that says that is available on windows 2000 or xp home without making it clear that it can only be a *manager* and not an *agent* is perhaps guilty of being disingenuous. I suspect that's where the adjective "disadvantage" may have inadvertently popped up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.7.195.250 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 23 March 2007

Client and server are pretty standard terms. In this case the client (aka "manager") is an application that allows you to connect to remote RDP servers and if authenticated, to get a desktop. Note that with Windows 2000 and 2003 you are getting a new desktop and not viewing/controlling the server's physical console desktop. Thus multiple clients can RDP into a single server and they don't see each other. As far as I know, there are no license restrictions on the clients. The RDP server component supports inbound connections from clients. These are licensed meaning that by default Windows is a single user machine and with licensed RDP sessions you can then have more than one user logged into the server at once.

As noted before, Windows XP has a remote access server ("agent") but it's part of the Remote Assistance feature. I've never used this but have the impression that if someone starts the Remote Assistance feature that they can see on the physical console what the logged in client ("manager") is doing.

As for Windows 2000 Professional - It does not come with a terminal services client but it looks like it's available for download from Microsoft [1] or [2] Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 17:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

style[edit]

Could someone please change all occurances of 'to remote' into 'to access remotely'? It hurts. Guenthert

Real pedants wouldn't stand the verb 'access', either, but it's easier than thinking. 'Abstracted' might be a suitable word, if it weren't so heavily overloaded in the industry. Superficially that may have similar status to access, but I'm not so sure. --ToobMug 11:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

supported operating systems[edit]

It should be mentioned that there is an open source implementation of the RDP server (for Linux and Unix/Unix like OS): xrdp. Guenthert

   More clear would be that there is an open source implementation of the RDP manager (for ....

---

This paragraph is misleading:

Work [...]. There are other products which provide RDP server functionality for LINUX using non RDP protocols such as VNC, NX and X Window System. These are however not compatible with the Windows RDP client.

Instead, it should be listed under "related work", "similar solutions" or in a category "Remote Desktop Protocols" or something AND linked to the appropriate pages. maxberger

general observation about definitions[edit]

Like a lot of technical definitions, this one does not really tell a user who knows very little what this protocol really does. I.e., what is the end user use case, how do RDP and MS Term Services help them do something? I have not used MTS so I can't answer this myself. I also don't mean this as a gripe, Wikipedia is an unbelievably positive accomplishment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.107.248.220 (talk • contribs) 11:44, November 27, 2006

Well, the first sentence of the definition is actually a tautology :/ 82.229.207.75 14:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What does "multi-channel protocol" in the first sentence mean? As far as I know, RDP is a straightforward client-server protocol from a network perspective, and doesn't implement back connections or dynamic data connections (as FTP, SQL*Net). Dave au (talk) 03:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. RDP operates over a single TCP port. Originally it was planned that audio would run over a separate UDP port, but this is no longer the case. The phrase "multi-channel" refers to the fact that besides basic graphics output RDP can also redirect devices (printers, drives), send audio, and share the clipboard. These additional features, according to the spec, and transferred over a virtual channel. Devster310 (talk) 00:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seamless Windows ?[edit]

The page says RDP 6.0 has the following new feature : "Seamless Windows: Remote applications can run on a client machine that are served by a Remote Desktop" connection. But older versions also can run remote apps on a client machine. Or does it mean, that the actual program is transferred and executed on the client ? Please clarify.

xerces8 --85.10.2.6 11:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "Seamless Windows" comes from Citrix, it means that the application program that is physically running on the remote processor has it's windows displayed directly on the local display the user cannot see the remote desktop. This is an alien concept to X where all remote applications use "Seamless windows" except for special programs like VNC and Xnest but it is an upgrade to the "Remote desktop" hack. 86.17.213.200 07:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to be updated for version 6[edit]

Version 6.0 supports 32-bit color, yet under features it only says 24-bit color. Also, is a section really needed for the new features in 6.0?

128.2.33.147 07:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I updated the article to reflect 32-bit color support. I also took out the "features new to 6.0" section; in its place I provided a link to MS's official new features page in the "version history" section. — EagleOne\^Talk 02:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RDP server functionality for LINUX[edit]

Work has started on an open source implementation of the RDP server available for Unix-like operating systems [3]. There are other products which provide RDP server functionality for LINUX using non RDP protocols such as VNC, NX and X Window System. These are however not compatible with the Windows RDP client. I think this line is now defunct, with the following first project, and another thread after -the XRDP software at least allows windows rdp clients to connect.

XRDP Linux RDP server, and an Ubuntu forum thread. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.68.110.116 (talk) 21:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

There is also a commercial RDP Server for Linux from Thinstuff. It is called LX Server and comes with a web based admin GUI. LX Server - Linux RDP server —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgibson99 (talk • contribs) 13:31, November 21, 2007

RemoteApp[edit]

RemoteApp info: [3] --soum ^talk 13:40, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RPC[edit]

Is RDP a variant of RPC? --Ramu50 (talk) 20:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As in Remote Procedure Call? If that is what you are meaning then no, not a variant and not really in the same arena. CupOfJava (talk) 06:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adverts[edit]

The entire "Other implementations" reads like some advertisement. I suggest we drop it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.246.7 (talk) 11:06, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have adjusted the "Other implementations" section to follow wiki guidelines and not be an advert. I sourced information from credible sources such as large vendors like Microsoft. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.246.7 (talk) 11:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Microsoft implementations[edit]

I want to suggest for consideration another open architecture, but closed source RDP client implementation. The product was developed by Elusiva. Please see http://www.elusiva.com/products/RemoteDesktopClient.aspx for more information. Two aspects about this might be notable: client works on various desktop and mobile platforms. Elusiva promised us Linux, Android and webOS in addition to Windows and Apple OS X and iOS available today. Another interesting fact, this client like Microsoft client can be extended by 3rd-party ISVs. Unlike rdesktop supporing only RDP 5.1, Elusiva supports current RDP 7 including Remote App. I thought that this could interesting to wikipedia readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.178.3.106 (talk) 08:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can we have some information on security concerns?[edit]

This being a Microsoft product, concerns for security (or lack thereof) are something real. There are a couple mentions in passing, about some exploits having been taken care of in the latest release (Win 7), but that leaves concerns on what the status is among those using Vista and legacy OSs. User:Yamaplos, away from his collection of passwords, sorry.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.136.92.126 (talk) 21:57, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Remote Desktop Connection 7.0 client update[edit]

Remote Desktop Connection 7.0 client update for Remote Desktop Services (RDS) for Windows XP SP3, Windows Vista SP1, and Windows Vista SP2 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/969084

~~PidGin128 (talk) 01:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, rdpclip crashing on server: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/itprovistanetworking/thread/39475a5d-fc4c-4d51-87a5-bb4e3ded318e

~~ PidGin128 (talk) 01:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is RDP considered as cloud computing?[edit]

I was looking for RDP, and found out that some sites considerring it as a cloud-computing service? Is it true? Can it be mentioned here? Or is it only true when buying a server which is using the RDP protocol to provide the user access to control the server (for example, as a replacement for SSH)? Anyway, using RDP is for remote access using the Internet - indepensently with the computer you are using, but the question is, when it's defined as a cloud? Only when it's provided by a large company, equipped with lots of servers, which are giving it away as a service by the browser (platform independent environment) after an online registration. Galzigler (talk) 13:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RDP might be used by a cloud service provider offering Desktop as a Service , or a means of providing remote console access to a Windows server, but beyond that it no relevance to cloud computing per se.

--SimonBramfitt (talk) 22:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which versions of Windows come with Remote Desktop?[edit]

The article should list which versions of Windows come with Remote Desktop, such as Windows 98, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8. It should also include subversion like Windows 7 Pro vs. Windows 7 Basic. This is very useful information.

Remote Desktop Services[edit]

The article "Remote Desktop Services", mentioned in the first paragraph, covers the same ground but does a better job of it. This article would be better trimmed down, and concentrating on the Protocol rather than the services.

Win 7 XP mode.[edit]

XP mode on Win 7 is also a RDP server, and it was partly broken by KB2592687 (RDP 8.1), which, among other things, changed or dissabled parts of the protocol:

http://support.microsoft.com/KB/2592687#Known%20issues

"RDP 8.0 on remote computers that are running Windows 7 SP1 does not use the UDP protocol." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.162.148 (talk) 06:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Enhanced Mode is implemented using a connection channel based on the Microsoft® Remote Desktop Services RDP protocol" [[4]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.162.148 (talk) 03:57, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

COI edit request: wikify[edit]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Making this as a request rather than just doing it as I'm a COI editor here: I work for Metaswitch, formerly known as Data Connection, and since acquired by Microsoft. Nonetheless I think this should be an uncontroversial change: please replace "Data Connection Limited" at the end of Remote Desktop Protocol#Version 4.0 with "[[Data Connection]]". —me_and 11:33, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done Since the company is a redirect to Metaswitch, I wikified it to that page instead. I also posted your COI declaration at the top of this talk page. Z1720 (talk) 16:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"proprietary protocol"?[edit]

How is RDP proprietary? It seem to be openly documented: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rdpbcgr And so are at least some extensions: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rdpegfx Not being developed by a commission or standardized by a regulatory body doesn't prevent a protocol from being open. eugrus (talk) 02:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]