Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration support

[thundergod255]

We inherited a client that is running a terminal server with 16 Device CALS.
The server has an application on it that is accessed by most users in the
office. I am worried that we will encounter issues soon for the following
two reasons:

1. While most users take their work laptop home with them, a few workers may
try to VPN and RDP to the server from their home computer. Based on my
understanding of the licensing, we will need to purchase additional CALS for
them because it is a new device.

2. As IT Support for the office, we have 2 or 3 techs that may have to
remote to the server from time to time for administration support. I noticed
that the licensing server has issued certificates from the computers that we
use when we remote in. Shouldn't the server have two built in licenses for
us to administrate it that is separate from the rest of the licensing?

This is becoming a problem because I think we are at a point where we need
more device CALS. However, it seems like there should be a work around
because 90% of the temporary licenses that are starting to be issued are from
our work computers or home computers when we access the server for support
purposes. Is there a way to prevent that type of RDP session from using a TS
Device CAL? Is the console remote session a workaround for this?

This client really should have been designed with per user licenses, because
they have only 12 users but from what I understand it may not be easy to
switch them. I think they have an open license, but they do not have any of
that information as their previous IT group is not available. I have read
that I may need software assurance to switch the CALS, or is there another
way?

In summary, I am having a hard time explaining to the client why they need
to pay $$ for more TS CALS when they have less than 16 users. When I told
them they were starting to go over and need more CALS they told me to delete
old users.

Thanks,

 

[Patrick Rouse]

RE: Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration support

I don't think console connections consume a TSCAL.
If you have SA for your TSCALs you can call the Microsoft Clearinghouse and
they will let you switch from per device to per user licensing.



--
Patrick C. Rouse
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Systems Consultant
Quest Software, Provision Networks Division
Virtual Client Solutions
http://www.provisionnetworks.com


"thundergod255" wrote:

> We inherited a client that is running a terminal server with 16 Device CALS.
> The server has an application on it that is accessed by most users in the
> office. I am worried that we will encounter issues soon for the following
> two reasons:
>
> 1. While most users take their work laptop home with them, a few workers may
> try to VPN and RDP to the server from their home computer. Based on my
> understanding of the licensing, we will need to purchase additional CALS for
> them because it is a new device.
>
> 2. As IT Support for the office, we have 2 or 3 techs that may have to
> remote to the server from time to time for administration support. I noticed
> that the licensing server has issued certificates from the computers that we
> use when we remote in. Shouldn't the server have two built in licenses for
> us to administrate it that is separate from the rest of the licensing?
>
> This is becoming a problem because I think we are at a point where we need
> more device CALS. However, it seems like there should be a work around
> because 90% of the temporary licenses that are starting to be issued are from
> our work computers or home computers when we access the server for support
> purposes. Is there a way to prevent that type of RDP session from using a TS
> Device CAL? Is the console remote session a workaround for this?
>
> This client really should have been designed with per user licenses, because
> they have only 12 users but from what I understand it may not be easy to
> switch them. I think they have an open license, but they do not have any of
> that information as their previous IT group is not available. I have read
> that I may need software assurance to switch the CALS, or is there another
> way?
>
> In summary, I am having a hard time explaining to the client why they need
> to pay $$ for more TS CALS when they have less than 16 users. When I told
> them they were starting to go over and need more CALS they told me to delete
> old users.
>
> Thanks,

 

[Jeff Pitsch]

Re: Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration support

Patrick is right, you should probably change over to per user licensing.

1) Yes you would need more per device cal's
2) Your admins are not connecting to the console. mstsc /console connects
directly to session 0 on Win2k3 and this does not take a license. Only one
person can be connected at a time. With remote app, you do not get the 2 +
1 free connections to the server, that is only for remote admin mode. The
license server doesn't know that the users are admins which is why it hands
out licenses when the /console option is not sued.

--
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Services

"thundergod255" <thundergod255@noemail.noemail> wrote in message
news:AEB2902B-7CB1-4945-B7B2-FB5FAFF5D82A@microsoft.com...
> We inherited a client that is running a terminal server with 16 Device
> CALS.
> The server has an application on it that is accessed by most users in the
> office. I am worried that we will encounter issues soon for the following
> two reasons:
>
> 1. While most users take their work laptop home with them, a few workers
> may
> try to VPN and RDP to the server from their home computer. Based on my
> understanding of the licensing, we will need to purchase additional CALS
> for
> them because it is a new device.
>
> 2. As IT Support for the office, we have 2 or 3 techs that may have to
> remote to the server from time to time for administration support. I
> noticed
> that the licensing server has issued certificates from the computers that
> we
> use when we remote in. Shouldn't the server have two built in licenses
> for
> us to administrate it that is separate from the rest of the licensing?
>
> This is becoming a problem because I think we are at a point where we need
> more device CALS. However, it seems like there should be a work around
> because 90% of the temporary licenses that are starting to be issued are
> from
> our work computers or home computers when we access the server for support
> purposes. Is there a way to prevent that type of RDP session from using a
> TS
> Device CAL? Is the console remote session a workaround for this?
>
> This client really should have been designed with per user licenses,
> because
> they have only 12 users but from what I understand it may not be easy to
> switch them. I think they have an open license, but they do not have any
> of
> that information as their previous IT group is not available. I have read
> that I may need software assurance to switch the CALS, or is there another
> way?
>
> In summary, I am having a hard time explaining to the client why they need
> to pay $$ for more TS CALS when they have less than 16 users. When I told
> them they were starting to go over and need more CALS they told me to
> delete
> old users.
>
> Thanks,

 

[James]

RE: Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration supp

RE: Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration supp

Is the only solution to avoid taking up device CALS when using our computers
for administration then is to use the console connections?

Is it possible to switch to per user if you do not have software insurance?
Again, I don't even know what their authorization or license codes are
because they lost all that information when they left their previous IT Group.

"Patrick Rouse" wrote:

> I don't think console connections consume a TSCAL.
> If you have SA for your TSCALs you can call the Microsoft Clearinghouse and
> they will let you switch from per device to per user licensing.
>
>
>
> --
> Patrick C. Rouse
> Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> Systems Consultant
> Quest Software, Provision Networks Division
> Virtual Client Solutions
> http://www.provisionnetworks.com
>
>
> "thundergod255" wrote:
>
> > We inherited a client that is running a terminal server with 16 Device CALS.
> > The server has an application on it that is accessed by most users in the
> > office. I am worried that we will encounter issues soon for the following
> > two reasons:
> >
> > 1. While most users take their work laptop home with them, a few workers may
> > try to VPN and RDP to the server from their home computer. Based on my
> > understanding of the licensing, we will need to purchase additional CALS for
> > them because it is a new device.
> >
> > 2. As IT Support for the office, we have 2 or 3 techs that may have to
> > remote to the server from time to time for administration support. I noticed
> > that the licensing server has issued certificates from the computers that we
> > use when we remote in. Shouldn't the server have two built in licenses for
> > us to administrate it that is separate from the rest of the licensing?
> >
> > This is becoming a problem because I think we are at a point where we need
> > more device CALS. However, it seems like there should be a work around
> > because 90% of the temporary licenses that are starting to be issued are from
> > our work computers or home computers when we access the server for support
> > purposes. Is there a way to prevent that type of RDP session from using a TS
> > Device CAL? Is the console remote session a workaround for this?
> >
> > This client really should have been designed with per user licenses, because
> > they have only 12 users but from what I understand it may not be easy to
> > switch them. I think they have an open license, but they do not have any of
> > that information as their previous IT group is not available. I have read
> > that I may need software assurance to switch the CALS, or is there another
> > way?
> >
> > In summary, I am having a hard time explaining to the client why they need
> > to pay $$ for more TS CALS when they have less than 16 users. When I told
> > them they were starting to go over and need more CALS they told me to delete
> > old users.
> >
> > Thanks,