Jump to content
RESET Forums (homeservershow.com)

License and Hyper-V


JasonP
 Share

Recommended Posts

Client Access License.  Clients are either Devices or Users.  Say you owned a business with 10 employees but for some reason you had 20 computers in the office.  Buying a Per User CAL would be more beneficial to you becasue you have fewer users than computers.  While on the other hand if you had a manufacturing plant with 50 computers and 1000 users, you could get by with 50 per Device CALS.

 

It can get confusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That makes more sense. Thanks. So basically, it's a 1 user or 1 computer.

 

Is it also true that Hyper-v is free in all versions of 2012 and 8?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That makes more sense. Thanks. So basically, it's a 1 user or 1 computer.

 

Is it also true that Hyper-v is free in all versions of 2012 and 8?

Part 1 - yes.

 

Part 2 - Hyper V is a role that you install.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MS Licencing is so convoluted that, often, MS can't explain it to even their own people.

Rep on that.

 

The reason I ask is I have a business that needs 2 Hyper-V's installed and setup but do not want to pay crazy for a Lic. So I assume this 1 CAL will work since it does not track connections since the device will also hold a media storage drive setup with lots of local remote connections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CAL's are Client Access License.  You need a license of 2012 for the server (IIRC, Standard allows a host + 2 VM's).  You also need a CAL for each device or user (depending on the type) that will access the server.  That is a device CAL, so it would allow 1 computer with any number of users on that computer.  With Device CAL's, you need 1 CAL for each workstation computer (desktop/laptop) that will access the server, along with a server license for the server itself.  I don't know how exactly CAL's work when you're dealing with VM's, if they can be shared between the VM's or not.

 

Like others said, Microsoft licensing is confusing, but that's how I understand it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFAIK it should work something like this.

 

I have a virtual server (let's say it is running Server 2012R2 with the Hyper-V role enabled), I would need to purchase a single copy of 2012R2, install it and enable the Hyper-V role and nothing else - I can't use this server for anything else.

 

I then install two virtual instances of Server 2012 on this host using the same key - and this is perfectly legal. I call them Server1 and Server2.

 

Server1 is a file server and will be accessed by the users in the office. Server2 is intended to be an Exchange server so I also need to purchase a copy of Exchange Server 2013 and install that.

 

So far so good but legally (although there doesn't seem to be any means of verifying and enforcing this), I also need to purchase CALs (client access licences) for all of the users and PCs in the office and here I have a choice between user CALs and device CALs.

 

Imagine I have twenty PCs but thirty part-time users - I would just purchase twenty device CALs because that would be cheaper. Alternatively suppose I have twenty PCs, thirty part-time workers but they all have tablets as well as the PCs. Now I would need to purchase 50 device CALs (20 computers and 30 tablets), or I can save money by just purchasing thirty user CALs. Now this only covers me for accessing the file server - nobody directly accesses the host so no CALs needed there but the Exchange Server needs a CAL for each user accessing it - so I'll need to purchase another thirty Exchange CALs  and these can become eye-wateringly expensive, especially if you have the Enterprise version rather than the Standard version of Exchange.

 

If I subsequently take on more staff or more computers then I'll need to purchase more CALs. If I install another file server, then as long as it is on the same domain, I don't need to purchase any more CALs to cover access to it. Of course if it is a SQL server then I'll need to get SQL CALs as well as the cost of SQL server itself.

 

And don't get me started on Terminal Services servers and RDS CALs.......

 

John 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...