Software cost of setting up a TS server?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WetBehindEars
  • Start date Start date
W

WetBehindEars

Guest
I would like to implement a TS server in our environment. My question to you
guys is how much does the Windows Server 2003 license cost and how much are
the CAL's for the TS server? Do I have to purchase just as many client
access licenses as I would CAL's for the TS? Or can I get away with one
client access licenses and purchase as many CAL's as needed?
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

WetBehindEars <WetBehindEars@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> I would like to implement a TS server in our environment. My
> question to you guys is how much does the Windows Server 2003 license
> cost and how much are the CAL's for the TS server? Do I have to
> purchase just as many client access licenses as I would CAL's for the
> TS? Or can I get away with one client access licenses and purchase
> as many CAL's as needed?

Hmmm. Well, CAL stands for "Client access license"

You will need a license (and media, of course) for W2003 Server...either
standard or enterprise. Then you will need as many Terminal Services CALs as
you require for your company's use. Unless you're also going to use this box
for something besides TS, which is not recommended anyway, you don't need
regular Windows Server CALs as you would if you were setting up a file/print
server, etc.

For pricing, I suggest you contact your preferred reseller and work with
them. They should also be able to answer your licensing questions - if not,
contact Microsoft directly as licensing can be a complex and arcane thing.
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

Excellent! This is exactly the information I needed. Thanks!

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:

> WetBehindEars <WetBehindEars@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > I would like to implement a TS server in our environment. My
> > question to you guys is how much does the Windows Server 2003 license
> > cost and how much are the CAL's for the TS server? Do I have to
> > purchase just as many client access licenses as I would CAL's for the
> > TS? Or can I get away with one client access licenses and purchase
> > as many CAL's as needed?
>
> Hmmm. Well, CAL stands for "Client access license"
>
> You will need a license (and media, of course) for W2003 Server...either
> standard or enterprise. Then you will need as many Terminal Services CALs as
> you require for your company's use. Unless you're also going to use this box
> for something besides TS, which is not recommended anyway, you don't need
> regular Windows Server CALs as you would if you were setting up a file/print
> server, etc.
>
> For pricing, I suggest you contact your preferred reseller and work with
> them. They should also be able to answer your licensing questions - if not,
> contact Microsoft directly as licensing can be a complex and arcane thing.
>
>
>
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS CALs.

From the Windows Server 2003 Pricing and Licensing FAQ
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/priclic
faq.mspx

Q. What is the difference between a Windows CAL and a Terminal Server
(TS) CAL?

A. A Windows CAL is required when a user or device is directly or
indirectly accessing a Windows server. Additionally, if the user or
device is accessing or using the terminal server functionality of
Windows Server Standard and Enterprise Editions, a TS CAL is also
required. As an exception to these rules, up to two users or devices
may access the server software only for server administration
purposes, without requiring either a TS CAL or Windows CAL.

_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

=?Utf-8?B?V2V0QmVoaW5kRWFycw==?=
<WetBehindEars@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote on 26 jan 2008 in
microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> Excellent! This is exactly the information I needed. Thanks!
>
> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:
>
>> WetBehindEars <WetBehindEars@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> > I would like to implement a TS server in our environment. My
>> > question to you guys is how much does the Windows Server 2003
>> > license cost and how much are the CAL's for the TS server?
>> > Do I have to purchase just as many client access licenses as
>> > I would CAL's for the TS? Or can I get away with one client
>> > access licenses and purchase as many CAL's as needed?
>>
>> Hmmm. Well, CAL stands for "Client access license"
>>
>> You will need a license (and media, of course) for W2003
>> Server...either standard or enterprise. Then you will need as
>> many Terminal Services CALs as you require for your company's
>> use. Unless you're also going to use this box for something
>> besides TS, which is not recommended anyway, you don't need
>> regular Windows Server CALs as you would if you were setting up
>> a file/print server, etc.
>>
>> For pricing, I suggest you contact your preferred reseller and
>> work with them. They should also be able to answer your
>> licensing questions - if not, contact Microsoft directly as
>> licensing can be a complex and arcane thing.
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote:
> I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS CALs.

Hmm - I didn't think so - it isn't being accessed for file/print/web.
However, as is often mentioned, licensing is a vast mystery and it's best to
call Microsoft directly.

>
> From the Windows Server 2003 Pricing and Licensing FAQ
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/priclic
> faq.mspx
>
> Q. What is the difference between a Windows CAL and a Terminal Server
> (TS) CAL?
>
> A. A Windows CAL is required when a user or device is directly or
> indirectly accessing a Windows server. Additionally, if the user or
> device is accessing or using the terminal server functionality of
> Windows Server Standard and Enterprise Editions, a TS CAL is also
> required. As an exception to these rules, up to two users or devices
> may access the server software only for server administration
> purposes, without requiring either a TS CAL or Windows CAL.
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Vera Noest
> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
>
> =?Utf-8?B?V2V0QmVoaW5kRWFycw==?=
> <WetBehindEars@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote on 26 jan 2008 in
> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:
>
>> Excellent! This is exactly the information I needed. Thanks!
>>
>> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:
>>
>>> WetBehindEars <WetBehindEars@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>> I would like to implement a TS server in our environment. My
>>>> question to you guys is how much does the Windows Server 2003
>>>> license cost and how much are the CAL's for the TS server?
>>>> Do I have to purchase just as many client access licenses as
>>>> I would CAL's for the TS? Or can I get away with one client
>>>> access licenses and purchase as many CAL's as needed?
>>>
>>> Hmmm. Well, CAL stands for "Client access license"
>>>
>>> You will need a license (and media, of course) for W2003
>>> Server...either standard or enterprise. Then you will need as
>>> many Terminal Services CALs as you require for your company's
>>> use. Unless you're also going to use this box for something
>>> besides TS, which is not recommended anyway, you don't need
>>> regular Windows Server CALs as you would if you were setting up
>>> a file/print server, etc.
>>>
>>> For pricing, I suggest you contact your preferred reseller and
>>> work with them. They should also be able to answer your
>>> licensing questions - if not, contact Microsoft directly as
>>> licensing can be a complex and arcane thing.
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

Hi,

Vera is correct.

In this case it is not a mystery. When logging on to a 2003
server via TS you must authenticate. Taking a look at the
EULA it becomes clear (it specifically lists authentication
as an one of the examples), excerpted below:

>>> Begin Excerpt

2. CLIENT ACCESS LICENSES ("CALs"). The
Software licensing model consists of an operating system
license and incremental CALs, so that the total cost for
the Software scales with usage. Several CAL types and
licensing modes are available to suit your individual needs.

a. Windows Server 2003 Client Access License ("Windows CAL")
Requirements. In addition to the license for the Server
Software, you must acquire a Windows CAL for each
individual person ("User") or Device that accesses or uses
the Server Software, whether directly or through a
Multiplexing Service (defined below). For example, a
Windows CAL is required for each User or Device that uses
any of the following services of the Server Software:

* authentication services (when user or application
credentials are exchanged between the Server Software
and a User or Device),

* file services (accessing or managing files or disk
storage),

* printing services (printing to a printer managed by the
Server Software), or

* remote access service (accessing the Server from a
remote location through a communications link,
including a virtual private network).

>>>>> End Excerpt

Additionally, the pricing and licensing page for TS 2003
has always said that windows CALs are required:

Licensing Terminal Server in Windows Server 2003 R2

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/ts2003.mspx

-TP

Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
> Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS CALs.
>
> Hmm - I didn't think so - it isn't being accessed for file/print/web.
> However, as is often mentioned, licensing is a vast mystery and it's
> best to call Microsoft directly.
>
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

And just to throw in some more confusion, if the 2003 TS is a member of an
SBS 2000 or SBS 2003 domain, then you would only need TS CALs, as SBS
domains and their SBS CALs cover access to all other Windows servers in the
domain. Additional Windows 2003 CALs for the TS are not needed IF you have
the proper number of SBS 200x CALs.

Gregg Hill




"TP" <tperson.knowspamn@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
news:u67gSYIYIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
>
> Vera is correct.
>
> In this case it is not a mystery. When logging on to a 2003 server via TS
> you must authenticate. Taking a look at the EULA it becomes clear (it
> specifically lists authentication as an one of the examples), excerpted
> below:
>
>>>> Begin Excerpt
>
> 2. CLIENT ACCESS LICENSES ("CALs"). The
> Software licensing model consists of an operating system
> license and incremental CALs, so that the total cost for
> the Software scales with usage. Several CAL types and
> licensing modes are available to suit your individual needs.
>
> a. Windows Server 2003 Client Access License ("Windows CAL")
> Requirements. In addition to the license for the Server
> Software, you must acquire a Windows CAL for each
> individual person ("User") or Device that accesses or uses
> the Server Software, whether directly or through a
> Multiplexing Service (defined below). For example, a
> Windows CAL is required for each User or Device that uses
> any of the following services of the Server Software:
> * authentication services (when user or application
> credentials are exchanged between the Server Software
> and a User or Device),
> * file services (accessing or managing files or disk
> storage),
> * printing services (printing to a printer managed by the
> Server Software), or
> * remote access service (accessing the Server from a
> remote location through a communications link,
> including a virtual private network).
>
>>>>>> End Excerpt
>
> Additionally, the pricing and licensing page for TS 2003 has always said
> that windows CALs are required:
>
> Licensing Terminal Server in Windows Server 2003 R2
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/ts2003.mspx
>
> -TP
>
> Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>> Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS CALs.
>>
>> Hmm - I didn't think so - it isn't being accessed for file/print/web.
>> However, as is often mentioned, licensing is a vast mystery and it's
>> best to call Microsoft directly.
>>
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

Gregg Hill <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote:
> And just to throw in some more confusion, if the 2003 TS is a member
> of an SBS 2000 or SBS 2003 domain, then you would only need TS CALs,
> as SBS domains and their SBS CALs cover access to all other Windows
> servers in the domain. Additional Windows 2003 CALs for the TS are
> not needed IF you have the proper number of SBS 200x CALs.
>
> Gregg Hill

If anyone needs me, I'll be over in the corner, repeatedly bashing my head
into the wall, in an effort to make the voices stop. Licensing drives me
batty. Thanks to all who've corrected me, I think!

>
>
>
>
> "TP" <tperson.knowspamn@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
> news:u67gSYIYIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>>
>> Vera is correct.
>>
>> In this case it is not a mystery. When logging on to a 2003 server
>> via TS you must authenticate. Taking a look at the EULA it becomes
>> clear (it specifically lists authentication as an one of the
>> examples), excerpted below:
>>
>>>>> Begin Excerpt
>>
>> 2. CLIENT ACCESS LICENSES ("CALs"). The
>> Software licensing model consists of an operating system
>> license and incremental CALs, so that the total cost for
>> the Software scales with usage. Several CAL types and
>> licensing modes are available to suit your individual needs.
>>
>> a. Windows Server 2003 Client Access License ("Windows CAL")
>> Requirements. In addition to the license for the Server
>> Software, you must acquire a Windows CAL for each
>> individual person ("User") or Device that accesses or uses
>> the Server Software, whether directly or through a
>> Multiplexing Service (defined below). For example, a
>> Windows CAL is required for each User or Device that uses
>> any of the following services of the Server Software:
>> * authentication services (when user or application
>> credentials are exchanged between the Server Software
>> and a User or Device),
>> * file services (accessing or managing files or disk
>> storage),
>> * printing services (printing to a printer managed by the
>> Server Software), or
>> * remote access service (accessing the Server from a
>> remote location through a communications link,
>> including a virtual private network).
>>
>>>>>>> End Excerpt
>>
>> Additionally, the pricing and licensing page for TS 2003 has always
>> said that windows CALs are required:
>>
>> Licensing Terminal Server in Windows Server 2003 R2
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/ts2003.mspx
>>
>> -TP
>>
>> Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>>> Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote:
>>>> I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS CALs.
>>>
>>> Hmm - I didn't think so - it isn't being accessed for
>>> file/print/web. However, as is often mentioned, licensing is a vast
>>> mystery and it's best to call Microsoft directly.
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

I was not correcting you, but just adding the inevitable monkey wrench of a
TS in an SBS domain.

The first time I looked at a TS licensing document, it was about 40 pages
long. I could hardly believe my eyes.

Regarding whether or not all other Windows servers are covered by SBS CALs,
two years ago there were many differing views. I called MS Licensing about
six times and got differing answers, then one guy argued that the product
use rights document proved it does not cover other servers. I sent about ten
pages of analysis of that document to Art Pettigrue and the lead on the
licensing team, proving that the guy's analysis was based upon his
misinterpretation of the document. Four months later, I received the reply
agreeing with me that it does cover all other Windows servers.

The documentation I sent took me days to compile, but at least they are now
in agreement.

If only we could simplify TS licensing!

Gregg Hill





"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmailatyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%23CpAwmQYIHA.4208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Gregg Hill <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> And just to throw in some more confusion, if the 2003 TS is a member
>> of an SBS 2000 or SBS 2003 domain, then you would only need TS CALs,
>> as SBS domains and their SBS CALs cover access to all other Windows
>> servers in the domain. Additional Windows 2003 CALs for the TS are
>> not needed IF you have the proper number of SBS 200x CALs.
>>
>> Gregg Hill
>
> If anyone needs me, I'll be over in the corner, repeatedly bashing my head
> into the wall, in an effort to make the voices stop. Licensing drives me
> batty. Thanks to all who've corrected me, I think!
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "TP" <tperson.knowspamn@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
>> news:u67gSYIYIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Vera is correct.
>>>
>>> In this case it is not a mystery. When logging on to a 2003 server
>>> via TS you must authenticate. Taking a look at the EULA it becomes
>>> clear (it specifically lists authentication as an one of the
>>> examples), excerpted below:
>>>
>>>>>> Begin Excerpt
>>>
>>> 2. CLIENT ACCESS LICENSES ("CALs"). The
>>> Software licensing model consists of an operating system
>>> license and incremental CALs, so that the total cost for
>>> the Software scales with usage. Several CAL types and
>>> licensing modes are available to suit your individual needs.
>>>
>>> a. Windows Server 2003 Client Access License ("Windows CAL")
>>> Requirements. In addition to the license for the Server
>>> Software, you must acquire a Windows CAL for each
>>> individual person ("User") or Device that accesses or uses
>>> the Server Software, whether directly or through a
>>> Multiplexing Service (defined below). For example, a
>>> Windows CAL is required for each User or Device that uses
>>> any of the following services of the Server Software:
>>> * authentication services (when user or application
>>> credentials are exchanged between the Server Software
>>> and a User or Device),
>>> * file services (accessing or managing files or disk
>>> storage),
>>> * printing services (printing to a printer managed by the
>>> Server Software), or
>>> * remote access service (accessing the Server from a
>>> remote location through a communications link,
>>> including a virtual private network).
>>>
>>>>>>>> End Excerpt
>>>
>>> Additionally, the pricing and licensing page for TS 2003 has always
>>> said that windows CALs are required:
>>>
>>> Licensing Terminal Server in Windows Server 2003 R2
>>>
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/ts2003.mspx
>>>
>>> -TP
>>>
>>> Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>>>> Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote:
>>>>> I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS CALs.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm - I didn't think so - it isn't being accessed for
>>>> file/print/web. However, as is often mentioned, licensing is a vast
>>>> mystery and it's best to call Microsoft directly.
>
>
>
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

I don't want to sound conceited, but isn't it mostly a myth that
licensing is so terribly difficult to understand (implying that it
is illogical)? In nearly all situations, I find licensing
requirements totally clear and intuitive: if you have a server and
a client, you need a server CAL. If you have a TS, you need a TS
CAL.

And exceptions are usually well-documented:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/techinfo/overview/li
censingfaq.mspx

Q. I want to have additional Windows-based servers in my Windows
Small Business Server 2003 domain. Do I need CALs for those
servers?
A. Your Windows Small Business Server 2003 CALs cover you for any
additional Windows-based servers in the domain. You do not need to
buy additional CALs for them.

OK, shoot me ... :-)

_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___


"Gregg Hill" <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote on 27 jan 2008 in
microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> I was not correcting you, but just adding the inevitable monkey
> wrench of a TS in an SBS domain.
>
> The first time I looked at a TS licensing document, it was about
> 40 pages long. I could hardly believe my eyes.
>
> Regarding whether or not all other Windows servers are covered
> by SBS CALs, two years ago there were many differing views. I
> called MS Licensing about six times and got differing answers,
> then one guy argued that the product use rights document proved
> it does not cover other servers. I sent about ten pages of
> analysis of that document to Art Pettigrue and the lead on the
> licensing team, proving that the guy's analysis was based upon
> his misinterpretation of the document. Four months later, I
> received the reply agreeing with me that it does cover all other
> Windows servers.
>
> The documentation I sent took me days to compile, but at least
> they are now in agreement.
>
> If only we could simplify TS licensing!
>
> Gregg Hill
>
>
>
>
>
> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> <lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmailatyahoo.com> wrote
> in message news:%23CpAwmQYIHA.4208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Gregg Hill <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>> And just to throw in some more confusion, if the 2003 TS is a
>>> member of an SBS 2000 or SBS 2003 domain, then you would only
>>> need TS CALs, as SBS domains and their SBS CALs cover access
>>> to all other Windows servers in the domain. Additional Windows
>>> 2003 CALs for the TS are not needed IF you have the proper
>>> number of SBS 200x CALs.
>>>
>>> Gregg Hill
>>
>> If anyone needs me, I'll be over in the corner, repeatedly
>> bashing my head into the wall, in an effort to make the voices
>> stop. Licensing drives me batty. Thanks to all who've corrected
>> me, I think!
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "TP" <tperson.knowspamn@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
>>> news:u67gSYIYIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Vera is correct.
>>>>
>>>> In this case it is not a mystery. When logging on to a 2003
>>>> server via TS you must authenticate. Taking a look at the
>>>> EULA it becomes clear (it specifically lists authentication
>>>> as an one of the examples), excerpted below:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Begin Excerpt
>>>>
>>>> 2. CLIENT ACCESS LICENSES ("CALs"). The
>>>> Software licensing model consists of an operating system
>>>> license and incremental CALs, so that the total cost for
>>>> the Software scales with usage. Several CAL types and
>>>> licensing modes are available to suit your individual
>>>> needs.
>>>>
>>>> a. Windows Server 2003 Client Access License ("Windows
>>>> CAL") Requirements. In addition to the license for the
>>>> Server Software, you must acquire a Windows CAL for each
>>>> individual person ("User") or Device that accesses or uses
>>>> the Server Software, whether directly or through a
>>>> Multiplexing Service (defined below). For example, a
>>>> Windows CAL is required for each User or Device that uses
>>>> any of the following services of the Server Software:
>>>> * authentication services (when user or application
>>>> credentials are exchanged between the Server Software
>>>> and a User or Device),
>>>> * file services (accessing or managing files or disk
>>>> storage),
>>>> * printing services (printing to a printer managed by
>>>> the
>>>> Server Software), or
>>>> * remote access service (accessing the Server from a
>>>> remote location through a communications link,
>>>> including a virtual private network).
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> End Excerpt
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, the pricing and licensing page for TS 2003 has
>>>> always said that windows CALs are required:
>>>>
>>>> Licensing Terminal Server in Windows Server 2003 R2
>>>>
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/
>>>> ts2003.mspx
>>>>
>>>> -TP
>>>>
>>>> Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>>>>> Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS
>>>>>> CALs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm - I didn't think so - it isn't being accessed for
>>>>> file/print/web. However, as is often mentioned, licensing is
>>>>> a vast mystery and it's best to call Microsoft directly.
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

Vera,

The article you mention was one of the docs I used to counter the PUR that
was misinterpreted. At the time, MS had three web articles that said exactly
the opposite of the page you noted, i.e., they said that an SBS CAL *is*
required to access the additional Windows server. Those articles are no
longer available.

In the case of SBS domains, several MS licensing folks claimed that an
additional Windows server in an SBS domain did require another SBS CAL.
Several others disagreed and said the SBS CALs covered the additional
Windows servers and that one could have 100 additional Windows servers
without consuming a single SBS CAL. The former argued until they were blue
in the face (in MANY emailed discussions), which is why I did my analysis.

One email response I received from MS licensing that really got my analysis
started read:

"Hello Gregg,



I did receive your voice mail but we are currently swamped, so I am writing
this in the spare moments between calls. I have read the KB article you
referred to in the voice mail. In fact I was discussing this issue with
another customer when you called. The FAQ regarding needing addition CALs
for computers running Server 2003 is, I think, poorly worded. The response
I received and forwarded on to you was a response from the development team,
as well as from teir 2 licensing experts. On page 20 in the Product Use
Rights document (which link I added to the previous e-mail) it explicitly
states that a Windows Server 2003 device on a Small Business Server 2003
domain will require one Small Business Server Device CAL in order to be
compliant with Microsoft licensing. For example, if you were running a
Small Business Server 2003 domain with one Windows Server 2003 running
Terminal Services and 27 users/computers in your buisness you would need
the following licenses to be compliant:



1 Small Business Server 2003 server license

1 Windows Server 2003 server license

28 Small Business Server 2003 Device CALs (27 for your users/computers, 1
for the Windows Server 2003 server)

1 Terminal Server CAL for every user using Terminal Services



As I suspected, the CAL the FAQ refers to is for server-to-server
communication. This is one a few instances in which you do need a license
for such communication. The other are listed in the PUR, pages 20 and 21.



I have sent this from my e-mail account so that if you have any futher
questions, or need further clarification, you may reach me.



Sincerely,



(Name removed to prevent embarrassment)"







He was misinterpreting the PUR document to which he referred, so I sent a
gob of documentation to Art to prove that point and he passed it on to the
licensing team leader. Art's only response to me was "Wow!" and not much
else.

I agree with your statement that "...if you have a server and a client, you
need a server CAL. If you have a TS, you need a TS CAL." What was in
question two years ago is what constituted a "client" and some MS folks
claimed that another Windows server was a client to an SBS server and
therefore required a CAL, which is not true.

No, I am not so conceited to think that I was the primary factor in their
decision, but I know I stirred the pot enough to get them to clarify the
answer to their own department. It took a LOT of documentation to get them
to understand their own PUR doc.

Gregg Hill




"Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:Xns9A32F2FEADA67veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...
>I don't want to sound conceited, but isn't it mostly a myth that
> licensing is so terribly difficult to understand (implying that it
> is illogical)? In nearly all situations, I find licensing
> requirements totally clear and intuitive: if you have a server and
> a client, you need a server CAL. If you have a TS, you need a TS
> CAL.
>
> And exceptions are usually well-documented:
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/techinfo/overview/li
> censingfaq.mspx
>
> Q. I want to have additional Windows-based servers in my Windows
> Small Business Server 2003 domain. Do I need CALs for those
> servers?
> A. Your Windows Small Business Server 2003 CALs cover you for any
> additional Windows-based servers in the domain. You do not need to
> buy additional CALs for them.
>
> OK, shoot me ... :-)
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Vera Noest
> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
>
>
> "Gregg Hill" <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote on 27 jan 2008 in
> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:
>
>> I was not correcting you, but just adding the inevitable monkey
>> wrench of a TS in an SBS domain.
>>
>> The first time I looked at a TS licensing document, it was about
>> 40 pages long. I could hardly believe my eyes.
>>
>> Regarding whether or not all other Windows servers are covered
>> by SBS CALs, two years ago there were many differing views. I
>> called MS Licensing about six times and got differing answers,
>> then one guy argued that the product use rights document proved
>> it does not cover other servers. I sent about ten pages of
>> analysis of that document to Art Pettigrue and the lead on the
>> licensing team, proving that the guy's analysis was based upon
>> his misinterpretation of the document. Four months later, I
>> received the reply agreeing with me that it does cover all other
>> Windows servers.
>>
>> The documentation I sent took me days to compile, but at least
>> they are now in agreement.
>>
>> If only we could simplify TS licensing!
>>
>> Gregg Hill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
>> <lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmailatyahoo.com> wrote
>> in message news:%23CpAwmQYIHA.4208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> Gregg Hill <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>> And just to throw in some more confusion, if the 2003 TS is a
>>>> member of an SBS 2000 or SBS 2003 domain, then you would only
>>>> need TS CALs, as SBS domains and their SBS CALs cover access
>>>> to all other Windows servers in the domain. Additional Windows
>>>> 2003 CALs for the TS are not needed IF you have the proper
>>>> number of SBS 200x CALs.
>>>>
>>>> Gregg Hill
>>>
>>> If anyone needs me, I'll be over in the corner, repeatedly
>>> bashing my head into the wall, in an effort to make the voices
>>> stop. Licensing drives me batty. Thanks to all who've corrected
>>> me, I think!
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "TP" <tperson.knowspamn@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:u67gSYIYIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Vera is correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> In this case it is not a mystery. When logging on to a 2003
>>>>> server via TS you must authenticate. Taking a look at the
>>>>> EULA it becomes clear (it specifically lists authentication
>>>>> as an one of the examples), excerpted below:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Begin Excerpt
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. CLIENT ACCESS LICENSES ("CALs"). The
>>>>> Software licensing model consists of an operating system
>>>>> license and incremental CALs, so that the total cost for
>>>>> the Software scales with usage. Several CAL types and
>>>>> licensing modes are available to suit your individual
>>>>> needs.
>>>>>
>>>>> a. Windows Server 2003 Client Access License ("Windows
>>>>> CAL") Requirements. In addition to the license for the
>>>>> Server Software, you must acquire a Windows CAL for each
>>>>> individual person ("User") or Device that accesses or uses
>>>>> the Server Software, whether directly or through a
>>>>> Multiplexing Service (defined below). For example, a
>>>>> Windows CAL is required for each User or Device that uses
>>>>> any of the following services of the Server Software:
>>>>> * authentication services (when user or application
>>>>> credentials are exchanged between the Server Software
>>>>> and a User or Device),
>>>>> * file services (accessing or managing files or disk
>>>>> storage),
>>>>> * printing services (printing to a printer managed by
>>>>> the
>>>>> Server Software), or
>>>>> * remote access service (accessing the Server from a
>>>>> remote location through a communications link,
>>>>> including a virtual private network).
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> End Excerpt
>>>>>
>>>>> Additionally, the pricing and licensing page for TS 2003 has
>>>>> always said that windows CALs are required:
>>>>>
>>>>> Licensing Terminal Server in Windows Server 2003 R2
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/
>>>>> ts2003.mspx
>>>>>
>>>>> -TP
>>>>>
>>>>> Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>>>>>> Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS
>>>>>>> CALs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm - I didn't think so - it isn't being accessed for
>>>>>> file/print/web. However, as is often mentioned, licensing is
>>>>>> a vast mystery and it's best to call Microsoft directly.
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote:
> I don't want to sound conceited, but isn't it mostly a myth that
> licensing is so terribly difficult to understand (implying that it
> is illogical)? In nearly all situations, I find licensing
> requirements totally clear and intuitive: if you have a server and
> a client, you need a server CAL. If you have a TS, you need a TS
> CAL.
>
> And exceptions are usually well-documented:
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/techinfo/overview/li
> censingfaq.mspx
>
> Q. I want to have additional Windows-based servers in my Windows
> Small Business Server 2003 domain. Do I need CALs for those
> servers?
> A. Your Windows Small Business Server 2003 CALs cover you for any
> additional Windows-based servers in the domain. You do not need to
> buy additional CALs for them.
>
> OK, shoot me ... :-)

Well, I've always thought you were, like, a MENSA genius or something
anyway, Vera. I'd say that MS' licensing model does confuse a lot of
normally intelligent beings. User v. device is a bit difficult to wrap one's
head around, where regular CALs are concerned. And remember SA? Resellers &
vendors frequently misunderstand how this stuff works and misinform people
as well.

A lot of my frustration is probably due to the fact that I find a lot of
licensing requirements too ridiculous for words. If I'm using a server for
TS *only* ...and I mean *only* - I shouldn't need to buy *two* freakin' CALs
per user (or device).

Oh, and to be even handed, it isn't only Microsoft that sends me into the
cranium-banging corner, not by a long shot. Don't get me started. :)

>
> _________________________________________________________
> Vera Noest
> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
>
>
> "Gregg Hill" <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote on 27 jan 2008 in
> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:
>
>> I was not correcting you, but just adding the inevitable monkey
>> wrench of a TS in an SBS domain.
>>
>> The first time I looked at a TS licensing document, it was about
>> 40 pages long. I could hardly believe my eyes.
>>
>> Regarding whether or not all other Windows servers are covered
>> by SBS CALs, two years ago there were many differing views. I
>> called MS Licensing about six times and got differing answers,
>> then one guy argued that the product use rights document proved
>> it does not cover other servers. I sent about ten pages of
>> analysis of that document to Art Pettigrue and the lead on the
>> licensing team, proving that the guy's analysis was based upon
>> his misinterpretation of the document. Four months later, I
>> received the reply agreeing with me that it does cover all other
>> Windows servers.
>>
>> The documentation I sent took me days to compile, but at least
>> they are now in agreement.
>>
>> If only we could simplify TS licensing!
>>
>> Gregg Hill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
>> <lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmailatyahoo.com> wrote
>> in message news:%23CpAwmQYIHA.4208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> Gregg Hill <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>> And just to throw in some more confusion, if the 2003 TS is a
>>>> member of an SBS 2000 or SBS 2003 domain, then you would only
>>>> need TS CALs, as SBS domains and their SBS CALs cover access
>>>> to all other Windows servers in the domain. Additional Windows
>>>> 2003 CALs for the TS are not needed IF you have the proper
>>>> number of SBS 200x CALs.
>>>>
>>>> Gregg Hill
>>>
>>> If anyone needs me, I'll be over in the corner, repeatedly
>>> bashing my head into the wall, in an effort to make the voices
>>> stop. Licensing drives me batty. Thanks to all who've corrected
>>> me, I think!
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "TP" <tperson.knowspamn@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:u67gSYIYIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Vera is correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> In this case it is not a mystery. When logging on to a 2003
>>>>> server via TS you must authenticate. Taking a look at the
>>>>> EULA it becomes clear (it specifically lists authentication
>>>>> as an one of the examples), excerpted below:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Begin Excerpt
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. CLIENT ACCESS LICENSES ("CALs"). The
>>>>> Software licensing model consists of an operating system
>>>>> license and incremental CALs, so that the total cost for
>>>>> the Software scales with usage. Several CAL types and
>>>>> licensing modes are available to suit your individual
>>>>> needs.
>>>>>
>>>>> a. Windows Server 2003 Client Access License ("Windows
>>>>> CAL") Requirements. In addition to the license for the
>>>>> Server Software, you must acquire a Windows CAL for each
>>>>> individual person ("User") or Device that accesses or uses
>>>>> the Server Software, whether directly or through a
>>>>> Multiplexing Service (defined below). For example, a
>>>>> Windows CAL is required for each User or Device that uses
>>>>> any of the following services of the Server Software:
>>>>> * authentication services (when user or application
>>>>> credentials are exchanged between the Server Software
>>>>> and a User or Device),
>>>>> * file services (accessing or managing files or disk
>>>>> storage),
>>>>> * printing services (printing to a printer managed by
>>>>> the
>>>>> Server Software), or
>>>>> * remote access service (accessing the Server from a
>>>>> remote location through a communications link,
>>>>> including a virtual private network).
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> End Excerpt
>>>>>
>>>>> Additionally, the pricing and licensing page for TS 2003 has
>>>>> always said that windows CALs are required:
>>>>>
>>>>> Licensing Terminal Server in Windows Server 2003 R2
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/
>>>>> ts2003.mspx
>>>>>
>>>>> -TP
>>>>>
>>>>> Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>>>>>> Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS
>>>>>>> CALs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm - I didn't think so - it isn't being accessed for
>>>>>> file/print/web. However, as is often mentioned, licensing is
>>>>>> a vast mystery and it's best to call Microsoft directly.
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmailatyahoo.com> wrote
on 28 jan 2008 in microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> Oh, and to be even handed, it isn't only Microsoft that sends me
> into the cranium-banging corner, not by a long shot. Don't get
> me started. :)

Now *that* is something we can agree upon immediately! I just
inherited responsibility for my company's IBM software, and I'm
completely confused. So maybe it's just a matter of what you have
grown up with :-)
_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

Gregg, I'm convinced that you had to fight long and hard to get
things right at that time.
But my main point was that the general consensus in this ng and
other places seems to be that licensing in general is
unintelligible and incomprehensible, which I find hard to
understand for 95% of all situations.
But I'm aware that I'm voicing a minority opinion :-)
_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

"Gregg Hill" <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote on 28 jan 2008 in
microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> Vera,
>
> The article you mention was one of the docs I used to counter
> the PUR that was misinterpreted. At the time, MS had three web
> articles that said exactly the opposite of the page you noted,
> i.e., they said that an SBS CAL *is* required to access the
> additional Windows server. Those articles are no longer
> available.
>
> In the case of SBS domains, several MS licensing folks claimed
> that an additional Windows server in an SBS domain did require
> another SBS CAL. Several others disagreed and said the SBS CALs
> covered the additional Windows servers and that one could have
> 100 additional Windows servers without consuming a single SBS
> CAL. The former argued until they were blue in the face (in MANY
> emailed discussions), which is why I did my analysis.
>
> One email response I received from MS licensing that really got
> my analysis started read:
>
> "Hello Gregg,
>
>
>
> I did receive your voice mail but we are currently swamped, so I
> am writing this in the spare moments between calls. I have read
> the KB article you referred to in the voice mail. In fact I was
> discussing this issue with another customer when you called.
> The FAQ regarding needing addition CALs for computers running
> Server 2003 is, I think, poorly worded. The response I received
> and forwarded on to you was a response from the development
> team, as well as from teir 2 licensing experts. On page 20 in
> the Product Use Rights document (which link I added to the
> previous e-mail) it explicitly states that a Windows Server 2003
> device on a Small Business Server 2003 domain will require one
> Small Business Server Device CAL in order to be compliant with
> Microsoft licensing. For example, if you were running a Small
> Business Server 2003 domain with one Windows Server 2003 running
> Terminal Services and 27 users/computers in your buisness you
> would need the following licenses to be compliant:
>
>
>
> 1 Small Business Server 2003 server license
>
> 1 Windows Server 2003 server license
>
> 28 Small Business Server 2003 Device CALs (27 for your
> users/computers, 1 for the Windows Server 2003 server)
>
> 1 Terminal Server CAL for every user using Terminal Services
>
>
>
> As I suspected, the CAL the FAQ refers to is for
> server-to-server communication. This is one a few instances in
> which you do need a license for such communication. The other
> are listed in the PUR, pages 20 and 21.
>
>
>
> I have sent this from my e-mail account so that if you have any
> futher questions, or need further clarification, you may reach
> me.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> (Name removed to prevent embarrassment)"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> He was misinterpreting the PUR document to which he referred, so
> I sent a gob of documentation to Art to prove that point and he
> passed it on to the licensing team leader. Art's only response
> to me was "Wow!" and not much else.
>
> I agree with your statement that "...if you have a server and a
> client, you need a server CAL. If you have a TS, you need a TS
> CAL." What was in question two years ago is what constituted a
> "client" and some MS folks claimed that another Windows server
> was a client to an SBS server and therefore required a CAL,
> which is not true.
>
> No, I am not so conceited to think that I was the primary factor
> in their decision, but I know I stirred the pot enough to get
> them to clarify the answer to their own department. It took a
> LOT of documentation to get them to understand their own PUR
> doc.
>
> Gregg Hill
>
>
>
>
> "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote
> in message
> news:Xns9A32F2FEADA67veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...
>>I don't want to sound conceited, but isn't it mostly a myth that
>> licensing is so terribly difficult to understand (implying that
>> it is illogical)? In nearly all situations, I find licensing
>> requirements totally clear and intuitive: if you have a server
>> and a client, you need a server CAL. If you have a TS, you need
>> a TS CAL.
>>
>> And exceptions are usually well-documented:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/techinfo/overview
>> /li censingfaq.mspx
>>
>> Q. I want to have additional Windows-based servers in my
>> Windows Small Business Server 2003 domain. Do I need CALs for
>> those servers?
>> A. Your Windows Small Business Server 2003 CALs cover you for
>> any additional Windows-based servers in the domain. You do not
>> need to buy additional CALs for them.
>>
>> OK, shoot me ... :-)
>>
>> _________________________________________________________
>> Vera Noest
>> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
>> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
>> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

Vera,

My first real look into licensing was for a 2000 TS, and if I remember
correctly, that doc was huge. Then along came a spider and the "SBS with
other server" questions that got debated here about two years ago.

Anyway, I know enough now to have mostly no problems with it.

Gregg Hill




"Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:Xns9A33E77A07AC7veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...
> Gregg, I'm convinced that you had to fight long and hard to get
> things right at that time.
> But my main point was that the general consensus in this ng and
> other places seems to be that licensing in general is
> unintelligible and incomprehensible, which I find hard to
> understand for 95% of all situations.
> But I'm aware that I'm voicing a minority opinion :-)
> _________________________________________________________
> Vera Noest
> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
>
> "Gregg Hill" <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote on 28 jan 2008 in
> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:
>
>> Vera,
>>
>> The article you mention was one of the docs I used to counter
>> the PUR that was misinterpreted. At the time, MS had three web
>> articles that said exactly the opposite of the page you noted,
>> i.e., they said that an SBS CAL *is* required to access the
>> additional Windows server. Those articles are no longer
>> available.
>>
>> In the case of SBS domains, several MS licensing folks claimed
>> that an additional Windows server in an SBS domain did require
>> another SBS CAL. Several others disagreed and said the SBS CALs
>> covered the additional Windows servers and that one could have
>> 100 additional Windows servers without consuming a single SBS
>> CAL. The former argued until they were blue in the face (in MANY
>> emailed discussions), which is why I did my analysis.
>>
>> One email response I received from MS licensing that really got
>> my analysis started read:
>>
>> "Hello Gregg,
>>
>>
>>
>> I did receive your voice mail but we are currently swamped, so I
>> am writing this in the spare moments between calls. I have read
>> the KB article you referred to in the voice mail. In fact I was
>> discussing this issue with another customer when you called.
>> The FAQ regarding needing addition CALs for computers running
>> Server 2003 is, I think, poorly worded. The response I received
>> and forwarded on to you was a response from the development
>> team, as well as from teir 2 licensing experts. On page 20 in
>> the Product Use Rights document (which link I added to the
>> previous e-mail) it explicitly states that a Windows Server 2003
>> device on a Small Business Server 2003 domain will require one
>> Small Business Server Device CAL in order to be compliant with
>> Microsoft licensing. For example, if you were running a Small
>> Business Server 2003 domain with one Windows Server 2003 running
>> Terminal Services and 27 users/computers in your buisness you
>> would need the following licenses to be compliant:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1 Small Business Server 2003 server license
>>
>> 1 Windows Server 2003 server license
>>
>> 28 Small Business Server 2003 Device CALs (27 for your
>> users/computers, 1 for the Windows Server 2003 server)
>>
>> 1 Terminal Server CAL for every user using Terminal Services
>>
>>
>>
>> As I suspected, the CAL the FAQ refers to is for
>> server-to-server communication. This is one a few instances in
>> which you do need a license for such communication. The other
>> are listed in the PUR, pages 20 and 21.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have sent this from my e-mail account so that if you have any
>> futher questions, or need further clarification, you may reach
>> me.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>>
>>
>> (Name removed to prevent embarrassment)"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> He was misinterpreting the PUR document to which he referred, so
>> I sent a gob of documentation to Art to prove that point and he
>> passed it on to the licensing team leader. Art's only response
>> to me was "Wow!" and not much else.
>>
>> I agree with your statement that "...if you have a server and a
>> client, you need a server CAL. If you have a TS, you need a TS
>> CAL." What was in question two years ago is what constituted a
>> "client" and some MS folks claimed that another Windows server
>> was a client to an SBS server and therefore required a CAL,
>> which is not true.
>>
>> No, I am not so conceited to think that I was the primary factor
>> in their decision, but I know I stirred the pot enough to get
>> them to clarify the answer to their own department. It took a
>> LOT of documentation to get them to understand their own PUR
>> doc.
>>
>> Gregg Hill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote
>> in message
>> news:Xns9A32F2FEADA67veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...
>>>I don't want to sound conceited, but isn't it mostly a myth that
>>> licensing is so terribly difficult to understand (implying that
>>> it is illogical)? In nearly all situations, I find licensing
>>> requirements totally clear and intuitive: if you have a server
>>> and a client, you need a server CAL. If you have a TS, you need
>>> a TS CAL.
>>>
>>> And exceptions are usually well-documented:
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/techinfo/overview
>>> /li censingfaq.mspx
>>>
>>> Q. I want to have additional Windows-based servers in my
>>> Windows Small Business Server 2003 domain. Do I need CALs for
>>> those servers?
>>> A. Your Windows Small Business Server 2003 CALs cover you for
>>> any additional Windows-based servers in the domain. You do not
>>> need to buy additional CALs for them.
>>>
>>> OK, shoot me ... :-)
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________
>>> Vera Noest
>>> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
>>> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
>>> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
 
Re: Software cost of setting up a TS server?

Don't feel so bad about the complexity of licensing, as I once corrected a
member of the MSFT TS Team on how the licensing works. It's not simple.

--
Patrick C. Rouse
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
SE, West Coast USA & Canada
Quest Software, Provision Networks Division
Virtual Client Solutions
http://www.provisionnetworks.com


"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" wrote:

> Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote:
> > I don't want to sound conceited, but isn't it mostly a myth that
> > licensing is so terribly difficult to understand (implying that it
> > is illogical)? In nearly all situations, I find licensing
> > requirements totally clear and intuitive: if you have a server and
> > a client, you need a server CAL. If you have a TS, you need a TS
> > CAL.
> >
> > And exceptions are usually well-documented:
> > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/techinfo/overview/li
> > censingfaq.mspx
> >
> > Q. I want to have additional Windows-based servers in my Windows
> > Small Business Server 2003 domain. Do I need CALs for those
> > servers?
> > A. Your Windows Small Business Server 2003 CALs cover you for any
> > additional Windows-based servers in the domain. You do not need to
> > buy additional CALs for them.
> >
> > OK, shoot me ... :-)
>
> Well, I've always thought you were, like, a MENSA genius or something
> anyway, Vera. I'd say that MS' licensing model does confuse a lot of
> normally intelligent beings. User v. device is a bit difficult to wrap one's
> head around, where regular CALs are concerned. And remember SA? Resellers &
> vendors frequently misunderstand how this stuff works and misinform people
> as well.
>
> A lot of my frustration is probably due to the fact that I find a lot of
> licensing requirements too ridiculous for words. If I'm using a server for
> TS *only* ...and I mean *only* - I shouldn't need to buy *two* freakin' CALs
> per user (or device).
>
> Oh, and to be even handed, it isn't only Microsoft that sends me into the
> cranium-banging corner, not by a long shot. Don't get me started. :)
>
> >
> > _________________________________________________________
> > Vera Noest
> > MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> > TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
> > ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
> >
> >
> > "Gregg Hill" <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote on 27 jan 2008 in
> > microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:
> >
> >> I was not correcting you, but just adding the inevitable monkey
> >> wrench of a TS in an SBS domain.
> >>
> >> The first time I looked at a TS licensing document, it was about
> >> 40 pages long. I could hardly believe my eyes.
> >>
> >> Regarding whether or not all other Windows servers are covered
> >> by SBS CALs, two years ago there were many differing views. I
> >> called MS Licensing about six times and got differing answers,
> >> then one guy argued that the product use rights document proved
> >> it does not cover other servers. I sent about ten pages of
> >> analysis of that document to Art Pettigrue and the lead on the
> >> licensing team, proving that the guy's analysis was based upon
> >> his misinterpretation of the document. Four months later, I
> >> received the reply agreeing with me that it does cover all other
> >> Windows servers.
> >>
> >> The documentation I sent took me days to compile, but at least
> >> they are now in agreement.
> >>
> >> If only we could simplify TS licensing!
> >>
> >> Gregg Hill
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> >> <lanwench@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmailatyahoo.com> wrote
> >> in message news:%23CpAwmQYIHA.4208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >>> Gregg Hill <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>> And just to throw in some more confusion, if the 2003 TS is a
> >>>> member of an SBS 2000 or SBS 2003 domain, then you would only
> >>>> need TS CALs, as SBS domains and their SBS CALs cover access
> >>>> to all other Windows servers in the domain. Additional Windows
> >>>> 2003 CALs for the TS are not needed IF you have the proper
> >>>> number of SBS 200x CALs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Gregg Hill
> >>>
> >>> If anyone needs me, I'll be over in the corner, repeatedly
> >>> bashing my head into the wall, in an effort to make the voices
> >>> stop. Licensing drives me batty. Thanks to all who've corrected
> >>> me, I think!
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> "TP" <tperson.knowspamn@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:u67gSYIYIHA.4272@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Vera is correct.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In this case it is not a mystery. When logging on to a 2003
> >>>>> server via TS you must authenticate. Taking a look at the
> >>>>> EULA it becomes clear (it specifically lists authentication
> >>>>> as an one of the examples), excerpted below:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Begin Excerpt
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. CLIENT ACCESS LICENSES ("CALs"). The
> >>>>> Software licensing model consists of an operating system
> >>>>> license and incremental CALs, so that the total cost for
> >>>>> the Software scales with usage. Several CAL types and
> >>>>> licensing modes are available to suit your individual
> >>>>> needs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> a. Windows Server 2003 Client Access License ("Windows
> >>>>> CAL") Requirements. In addition to the license for the
> >>>>> Server Software, you must acquire a Windows CAL for each
> >>>>> individual person ("User") or Device that accesses or uses
> >>>>> the Server Software, whether directly or through a
> >>>>> Multiplexing Service (defined below). For example, a
> >>>>> Windows CAL is required for each User or Device that uses
> >>>>> any of the following services of the Server Software:
> >>>>> * authentication services (when user or application
> >>>>> credentials are exchanged between the Server Software
> >>>>> and a User or Device),
> >>>>> * file services (accessing or managing files or disk
> >>>>> storage),
> >>>>> * printing services (printing to a printer managed by
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> Server Software), or
> >>>>> * remote access service (accessing the Server from a
> >>>>> remote location through a communications link,
> >>>>> including a virtual private network).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> End Excerpt
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Additionally, the pricing and licensing page for TS 2003 has
> >>>>> always said that windows CALs are required:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Licensing Terminal Server in Windows Server 2003 R2
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/
> >>>>> ts2003.mspx
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -TP
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
> >>>>>> Vera Noest [MVP] <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> I'm pretty sure that you *do* need both server CALs and TS
> >>>>>>> CALs.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hmm - I didn't think so - it isn't being accessed for
> >>>>>> file/print/web. However, as is often mentioned, licensing is
> >>>>>> a vast mystery and it's best to call Microsoft directly.
>
>
>
>
 
Back
Top