Local DOS/LPT1 Printing in TS for W2K or W2K3

[Devon Brooks]

Good day,

I have been a long time TS administrator, but have just
recently found this excellent newsgroup. Hopefully
someone will kindly help me out!

We are running two TS servers on W2K, and one test TS
server on W2K3. Our TS servers are in place for a single,
DOS-based application that requires an LPT1 mapping to
print.

Currently, on the client-side, we are printer-pooling a
DirectIP printer connection w/ LPT1 so that the printer
gets created inside of the TS session. Of course, though,
we also require an LPT1 connection inside of the TS
session as well.

I have tried numerous programs, numerous scripts, registry
entries, and more, but am unable to correct this issue.

What I need is this:

For each clent that enters a TS session, I'd like for
their TS<xxx> printer port to be pooled w/ LPT1, so that a
print job that gets sent to LPT1 is redirected to the
TS<xxx> port.

Would someone kindly lend me some assistance - it would be
greatly appreciated!

Thanks in advance!

Regards,
Devon Brooks
MCNE, MCP

 

[Matthew Harris [MVP]]

I think Claudio posted a script that could do this. Try
searcing the archives of this newsgroup for his script.

-M

 

[Devon Brooks]

Hi Matthew,

I searched and found Claudio's script. Unfortunately, the
script is designed for W2K, and we are in the process of
upgrading our server's to W2K3.

I am wondering if there is an updated version of this
script, as W2K3 formats their printer ID/session/client
differently in W2K3 as they did in W2K.

If there isn't an updated version of this script, is there
perhaps another way of auto-connecting LPT1 to the TS
printer port?

Again - thanks in advance for your help! It is
appreciated.

Regards,
Devon Brooks.

 

[Devon Brooks]

Hi Matthew,

For some reason, my response to this on 09/15 wasn't
posted - so I will try again.

I found Claudio's script, but it is for W2K, not W2K3. I
am wondering if there is an updated version of this, or if
it can be modified to W2K3's TS printer ID format, as it
is quite different than the naming conventions using in
W2K.

Thanks in advance!

Regards,
Devon Brooks.