*** Bug 1367677 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

The RHEL6 remote-viewer does not support the new engine SSO: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1347656

For this reason it has been decided to disallow it's usage from RHEV: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285883#c16

(In reply to Tomas Jelinek from comment #2)
> The RHEL6 remote-viewer does not support the new engine SSO:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1347656
> 
> For this reason it has been decided to disallow it's usage from RHEV:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285883#c16

Hi Tomas,

As Pavel said in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1367677#c4, rhel6 support rhevm4.0 and 
using method in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1367677#c6, the guest's console could be connected at rhevm4.0 on rhel6

I think it is very inconvenient for customers who don't want to change os to rhel7

Hi Pavel,

Could you help to see this? Thanks

(In reply to mxie from comment #5)
> Hi Pavel,
> 
> Could you help to see this? Thanks

I didn't know about https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285883#c20

imo saying that "Remote Viewer version 99 is required" is misleading / a strange solution, at least the website mentioned in the error message could clarify the rhel6 support...

As https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1367988#c2 said, rhel6 doesn't support rhevm4.0, I think it is necessary to improve error info when failed to open guest's console in rhevm4.0 on rhel6, so reopen the bug and change the bug description

(In reply to Tomas Jelinek from comment #2)
> The RHEL6 remote-viewer does not support the new engine SSO:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1347656
> 
> For this reason it has been decided to disallow it's usage from RHEV:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285883#c16

For what it's worth, SPICE client connection to RHEV takes 2 very different paths. Most of the work (ie connection to the display) is done through a .vv file, which does not need the new engine SSO. Then you have foreign menu (to dynamically change ISOs), which needs SSO support. It's imo a minor missing feature, and blocking the client altogether just because this is not supported seems overkill to me. I'm fine with either decision, just wanted to mention this in case it's not obvious to everyone involved.

Either way, in order to improve the message we would need a new message for the case when the whole "platform" is not supported, in this case rhel6. Not sure if it's worth the hassle, I would sugest WONTFIX and a kbase