Re: SBS 2003 / Virual Server / Terminal Server
- From: "Jeff Pitsch" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 10:45:46 -0500
Patrick is right you always need the server license.
Jeff Pitsch
http://www.sbcgatekeeper.com
Your Terminal Services Security Website
"Patrick Rouse" <PatrickRouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6CD52B11-CB6F-4BFC-9CE2-91342681B47F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> I'm NOT referring to client access licenses, but rather the Server
> License.
> When you run VMs you need an appropriate OS license for each guest OS.
> --
> Patrick Rouse
> Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> http://www.sessioncomputing.com
>
>
> "HOTWIREDTECH" wrote:
>
>> Patrick,
>>
>> That paragraph is directly from a MS whitepaper.
>>
>> http://download.microsoft.com/download/7/5/2/75219da3-8c11-496c-978f-e6892762e874/ADS_TermServ.doc
>>
>> If I understand it correctly (and I may not), shouldn't his SBS CALS
>> cover
>> it? If not, can I get a license without CALs?
>>
>> "Patrick Rouse" wrote:
>>
>> > You will still need a server 2003 license for the VM instance.
>> > --
>> > Patrick Rouse
>> > Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
>> > http://www.sessioncomputing.com
>> >
>> >
>> > "HOTWIREDTECH" wrote:
>> >
>> > > This is what I found as fasr as the licensing:
>> > >
>> > > For a small organization, it is recommended that one server run
>> > > Windows
>> > > Small Business Server and a second server run Terminal Services. To
>> > > facilitate this and to simplify the licensing requirements for this
>> > > scenario,
>> > > Microsoft allows the client-access license (CAL) for Windows Small
>> > > Business
>> > > Server to satisfy the CAL requirement for Windows Server on the
>> > > second server.
>> > >
>> > > I have no idea how this works. Would I just use the same product key
>> > > on the
>> > > second server? Does that work?
>> > >
>> > > Any ideas?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > "Jeff Pitsch" wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > From a high level it sounds like you'd be all right. Although VS
>> > > > performance will never be the same as a normal server so you'll
>> > > > want to test
>> > > > first. Aren't SBS CAL's per server and not per user/per device
>> > > > though?
>> > > >
>> > > > Jeff Pitsch
>> > > > http://www.sbcgatekeeper.com
>> > > > Your Terminal Services Security Website
>> > > >
>> > > > "HOTWIREDTECH" <HOTWIREDTECH@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>> > > > message
>> > > > news:557279F9-8AD3-46CF-8C95-53B781602A05@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > >I have a client with an existing SBS 2003 server. He now wants to
>> > > > >be able
>> > > > >to
>> > > > > have Terminal Services capablity as well. I know that SBS does
>> > > > > not
>> > > > > support
>> > > > > Terminal Sessions, but could I run a virtual server within SBS
>> > > > > installed
>> > > > > with
>> > > > > Server 2003 and terminal services enabled? I believe that the
>> > > > > SBS Cal's
>> > > > > will
>> > > > > fulfuill the second server's licensing and all I would have to do
>> > > > > it
>> > > > > purchase
>> > > > > Virtual Server and the TS CALs. There will be a max of 5
>> > > > > terminal server
>> > > > > clients. They are runnning Dual Opteron 246 with 2 GB RAM.
>> > > > > There are
>> > > > > only 4
>> > > > > or 5 users in the business. Has anyone ran a similar senario?
>> > > > > If so, how
>> > > > > did it turn out?
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
.
- References:
- Re: SBS 2003 / Virual Server / Terminal Server
- From: Jeff Pitsch
- Re: SBS 2003 / Virual Server / Terminal Server
- From: HOTWIREDTECH
- Re: SBS 2003 / Virual Server / Terminal Server
- From: Patrick Rouse
- Re: SBS 2003 / Virual Server / Terminal Server
- Prev by Date: Re: SBS 2003 / Virual Server / Terminal Server
- Next by Date: Re: Terminal Server - Opteron vs Xeon, multi core vs processor speed.
- Previous by thread: Re: SBS 2003 / Virual Server / Terminal Server
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|