This message was deleted.

Only on 2203 CU3. What we see are disconnects on IGEL thinclients with an older firmware versions.

No issues on VDA Server 2022

No issues in windows 10 22h2

Thanks for your feedback, I'm opening a case 🙃

can you pls share the case number?

Here. I've got 2 deployments that suffered BSOD's. Rolling back just the VDA (rest of the depoloyment left at CU4, VDA's left patched by WSUS) fixed the issues. In both cases we're talking Server 2019, MCS and vmware. One has WEM, the other does not.

pls open a support case , we will work with you to investigate and address the issue.

Case Number 82398889

Just came here to look for this symptom. Seeing the same on Server 2019 OS. I will share a case number as soon as we get it opened in a few minutes.

thanks, working to get this routed internally. thanks

Our Case #82399825 Co-worker is in the process of Zipping memory dump files to attach to the above case as well. They should show up "soon".

thanks

We appreciate your assistance with this as well!

we are checking on the issue, pls give us a day or two

Yeah, will do.

Besides, it was not waiting a month after release that got us here in the first place. You wonder what QA is doing over there...

Let's be real, they can't QA everything with so many scenarios. We are part of the QA and we should QA when rolling out.

My guess is that "VDA on 2019" is kinda the biggest scenario though. But you're probably right. Just a bit salty, is all.

Also, to be fair, we put it on a few servers day of release and let it run for about 2 weeks with no issue seen. Only when we put it on a couple client servers that issues started happening. There are several things that are different in the usage of our internal staff compared to our clients. Just saying there are certainly circumstances that Citrix can't test for, just like I can only do so much testing before releasing to clients. My frustration is mainly that new bugs (functionality changes?) keep creeping into bug fix releases. I feel like I'm CR with the number of changes getting introduced into CU releases. I know it's not that way, but I just want a stable release I can push out. I can relate to the "Just a bit salty".

sorry, folks! ack the feedback. We will take the feedback and figure out the gap.

Mine are still 2203 CU2.

Same for us CU2

thanks

2203 CU4 DDC for both of mine. And they've remained that way. VDA CU3 fixed the issue.

Thank you. Pls continue to work with the Citrix support engineer, we are working on a fix based off of 2203 CU4. thanks

We have CU4 running against cloud DDCs with no issues, only our on-premise ones were crashing against 2203 DDCs, not sure if that helps. We rolled everything back in our environment though.

pls open a case and ref this kb, if you could. thanks

If your support engineer hasn't gotten to you yet, there is a signed hotfix created for the issue. We are attempting to get it downloaded so we can push it to the few clients we have running CU4.

So far, we've received and tested an unsigned hotfix, which works perfectly.

@François-Xavier Rigaud Thanks for the feedback. I declined the unsigned version as it's a pain to put in with our security solutions.

Yes, we had to change our sealing sequence because our security tools blocked the switch to test mode.

What is the case number and escalate support engineer, can you please share?

Case Number 82398889

Following up

Thanks

It is very possible I am incorrect in what we received was signed fully. I saw a digital signature, but when I compare to the current CU4 version is it missing a second signature for Microsoft Windows Hardware Compatibility Publisher.

Files given out are not signed . Please work with escalation on eta for signed files. Thanks

Thank you for this confirmation

Yeah, unsigned are not going to fly and I thought we were clear on that...<shrug>

@Dennis Parker We received the signed fix this afternoon.

Thanks @François-Xavier Rigaud Trying to get it now as well.

CTX584794 says nothing about a fix, guess it's still too soon to make it public?

Still haven't been able to get a signed copy, even using @François-Xavier Rigaud case number as a reference...

@Dennis Parker Did he give you any details about this regression? We have not been notified.

No details provided at all.

We did a partial rollback to CU3 after receiving complaints about random disconnects in published applications. Randomness makes it difficult to collect traces.

Are you using CU4 Update 1 that was released today?

@Nick Patel What's this now? Hmmm...going to look for this. Thanks for the heads up.

Fixed issues in 2203 LTSR Cumulative Update 4 (CU4) Update 1 VDA for single-session and multi-session OS System Exception VDAs might experience a fatal exception on picadd.sys and display a blue screen with the following error message: Error: Bug Check 0x96 INVALID_WORK_QUEUE_IT

I had resigned myself to waiting for CU5 by now...