Driving me insane with remote connections in SQL 2005

I have developed an application that utilize SQL server 2005. The application is a clickonce application and launched from the IIS. The problem is that when im trying to connect from outside the company i get the Error that the server does not accept remote connections.

I have used the surface manager and setup the protocol to accept remote connections. Nothing happens.

I have changed the IIS to use the configuration screens under the .NET configuration in IIS. Nothing helps there either.

I have open the ports 445 ,1433, 1434

Anyone knows what i could do to get the connections working on the %%%%%%

I'm moving your question to the data access forum where you should get an answer.|||

Can you post the exact error msg here?
Is your SQL instance the default instance? Can you check whether it's listening on NP and/or TCP? and TCP port number? You need to run SQL Browser. I assume you opened port UDP 1434, not TCP 1434.

or at best, collect information according to
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=362498&SiteID=1

Thanks,

|||Have a look at:
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=2464749&SiteID=1

Mortaza Doulaty
http://www.mrt-web.com

Drive allocation

Any comments, please. I have a new server 5x160GB drives. It needs to run IIS for a web app and SQL Server 2005. One user database. I was thinking of dividing space as follows and wanted to get some thoughts from others.

2 drives = RAID 1 set, 160GB space, OS, IIS, SQL exe, tempDB, user database log file

3 drives = RAID 5 set, 320GB space, SQL data files, user database files

Thanks for looking...

With just two virtual drives, it is a tough call.

I'd probably put the TempDb on the RAID 5 set -leaving only the Transaction Log on the Mirror set.

|||Thanks. I did not know what to do with the tempdb. Also, is there any benefit to try and create multiple partitions on a single logical disk array? So that one RAID 1 set has a partition for [C drive] and a partition for [L drive] to hold the transaction log? Or should it just be a single partition for the C drive, and put everything on that same logical drive partition?|||

The only significant benefit is in 'housekeeping' -easier to backup all files in a partition, for example.

However, in this situation, it seems like a little extra overhead for no additional benefit.

Hopefully, on a operational server, hosting no other applications except SQL Server, there will be very little disk activity required except for the TRANSACTION Log file -so there should not be any fragmentation, and the heads will most often be in the optimal location.

|||Thanks, your input has been helpful.