Remote Desktop Gateway Server Temporarily Unavailable?

3 posts in this topic

Remote access web site works fine as does RDP directly to any client behind my router. However, when I attempt to login to the WHS 2011 remote access web site and CONNECT to an available PC via the web UI, it returns the remote desktop gateway server temporarily available error message. I noticed that the Remote Desktop Gateway service didn't exist, so I added this role onto the machine. Though I continue to receive the following message and was hoping someone could guide me through resolving it.

Your computer can't connect to the remote computer because the Remote Desktop Gateway server is temporarily unavailable. Try reconnecting later or contact your network administrator for assistance.

Needless to say, I don't wish to do a complete reinstall of my WHS 2011 OS. Any guidance would be appreciated.

UPDATE: unfortunately it's not possible to resolve this error nor is it possible to identify the cause. the only resolution is to do a full re-install of WHS 2011 OS.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Upgrade to a WGS Supporter Account to remove this ad.

Got this message when I RDP into a client and rebooted the WHS. WHS came up. RDP into the client again. Got the error.

A minute later, was able to get in.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just encountered the same error when I tried to access pc on local network via my WHS over the internet. It was fixable and did not require a reinstall. Turns out the issue was caused by trying to remote in via WinXP SP3. I resolved my issues by downloading and running these 2 patch/fixes:

Microsoftfixit50588.msi found here:

and Windowsxp-kb969084-x86-enu.exe found here:

After installing these patches, was able to remote access my whs 2011 server and then connect to my win7 pc on my home network.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Upgrade to a WGS Supporter Account to remove this ad.

  • Posts

    • Well, what are you upgrading from?  If it's Windows Home Server, are you using its client backup feature?  And if so, is this something you want to continue? What do you use your server for, and are there any new capabilities you want to take advantage of?
    • OK here is my problems I have an old dell 1430 server with a 256mb ssd drive and 2 3MB hdds. the ssd drive is where I would install win 10 . what do I have to do to make this (upgrade) to win 10 go as smoothly as "possible"? I can put the OS on a hdd also this is a store bought version of win 10 home.
    • I wouldn't go for Storage Spaces - there have been reports of issues when a disk goes bad (and I too have had that sort of problem). You can go down the RAID route if you have the hardware controller to support it - don't go for software RAID. Alternatively, have a look at Stablebit Drivepool which give you the flexibility of duplication at the folder level or across all storage. If you have data that doesn't need to be protected, you don't have to sacrifice the space for duplication of that folder. 
    • Like I said, you won't get the combined (aggregate) bandwidth to a single destination.   Torrenting makes multiple outgoing and can receive multiple incoming connections to and from multiple seeders and leechers (behaving more like the load-balanced scenario) in the best-case scenario, so it's one of the few applications that scale fairly well with WAN load-balancing, and if you're just downloading data, the torrent application can reassemble the whole torrent from the randomly received chunks from each seeder.  Torrent was almost designed to benefit from WAN load-balancing because of the way the P2P network was conceived. ...but that wouldn't work for streaming media or online gaming or VoIP where there's no mechanism to deal with out-of-order packets being sent and received, or the fact that it's still asymmetrically routed -- in that instance, you're still limited to the bandwidth of a single connection, you can just make more of them at a time on different paths.   802.3ad or LACP (Dynamic Link Aggregation) requires switching and routing hardware that's also LACP-compliant in order for it to work, but in that case, would be more like the aforementioned ISP IMUX connection than WAN load-balancing.   Your SpeedTest results are probably from burstable traffic over one connection, because a single SpeedTest run will only use one connection during the course of that test run, which is why it only shows a single public IP address. Sustained bandwidth testing with something like iPerf will show a more accurate picture.   Speedify would pretty much have to be tunneling all traffic as the "first hop" and reassembling traffic before going back out to the public Internet so that their VPN endpoint becomes your new public IP address out on the Internet; in essence becoming an ISP over an ISP -- if that's what it's actually doing.  While that may solve one issue, it would probably cause a drastic increase in latency to do so, and I doubt it would support streaming media very well.
    • Hi, Thanks for the reply. I understand what you mean but then that's like having 2 DC's having DHCP to issue IP in case one goes down, so both DHCP scopes would have to issue same IP address to same client or they would run out of addresses. But anyway thanks for clarifying, I was getting really frustrated about not being able to solve this because I was understanding that the clients would not leave the network when the DC is down and authentication takes place at RODC. Thanks a lot.
  • Popular Contributors