Server 2012 upgrade considerations

[boss6021]

Hey guys,

I have a project coming up to accomplish the following. I wanted to go over the current setup, and the desired outcome to see if I was missing anything.

Here is the current setup:

Host
Server 2008 R2 Standard
1x Dell R710 server
2x Intel Xeon E5645 processors
24GB of RAM
6x 10K SAS array

VM #1
SBS 2011
4x processors
12GB of RAM

VM #2
Server 2003 Terminal Server
4x processors
9GB of RAM

The client is wanting to upgrade the Server 2003 VM to Server 2012. I would like to bring up another VM and transfer the data from the 2003 VM to the 2012 VM. I believe there is a limitation in that only 2 VMs can be hosted on this configuration. My thought to overcome this would be to build the VM on a separate hyper-v server, and import it onto the 2008 R2 host when finished setting it up.

I am also curious if it would be possible to upgrade the Host to Server 2012, and then use the same license as a VM. I'm doubting this will be the case.

Thanks in advance for any responses.

 

[QHalo]

IIRC, the 2 VM limit is a use limit based on license. It shouldn't prevent you from spinning up your new VM and then transitioning to it as long as when you're done you're left with two machines. Just shutdown and delete the old.

 

[boss6021]

IIRC, the 2 VM limit is a use limit based on license. It shouldn't prevent you from spinning up your new VM and then transitioning to it as long as when you're done you're left with two machines. Just shutdown and delete the old.

That would certainly make this upgrade easier. I had considered un-allocating some memory from the 2003 VM, and spinning up the VM for the 2012 TS VM. I just wasn't sure how hard coded the licensing was, and whether I would be able to spin up the 3rd VM.

 

[QHalo]

Try it out. You don't even need to install an OS. Just make up a really small VM and try and turn it on.

 

[bigdogchris]

The 2012 Standard grants 2 VM licenses or 1 physical + 1 VM.

If you install 2012 and enable Hyper-V on a server, but do not enable any other roll, you can run both VM's on the box.

 

[boss6021]

The 2012 Standard grants 2 VM licenses or 1 physical + 1 VM.

If you install 2012 and enable Hyper-V on a server, but do not enable any other roll, you can run both VM's on the box.

Ok, so what you are saying is that I could upgrade the host, and the terminal server with the 1 license?

 

[DeChache]

The 2VM part of the license you are seeing is saying that you can use that key for up to 2 VMs not that you can only run 2 VMs on that system. You can spin up VMs to your hearts content

 

[bigdogchris]

The 2VM part of the license you are seeing is saying that you can use that key for up to 2 VMs not that you can only run 2 VMs on that system. You can spin up VMs to your hearts content

Yes, exactly. If you had 2 Server 2012 licenses, you could install the OS on the hardware, enable Hyper-V, and run 4 VM's.

I just wanted to make sure it was clear. I've read plenty of stories about people installing the OS on the box, enabling a bunch of roles, then thinking they can add 2 more VM's -all with one license.

 

[boss6021]

I just wanted to make sure it was clear. I've read plenty of stories about people installing the OS on the box, enabling a bunch of roles, then thinking they can add 2 more VM's -all with one license.[/QUOTE]

Ok, the only thing i'm looking to do is upgrade the host, setup a 3rd VM and install 2012 on it, transfer the data from the 2003 TS VM, and then decommission the 2003 TS VM with a single 2012 standard license. If that's possible, then this will be very easy.

Thanks for all the input guys.

 

[DeChache]

Yes, exactly. If you had 2 Server 2012 licenses, you could install the OS on the hardware, enable Hyper-V, and run 4 VM's.

I just wanted to make sure it was clear. I've read plenty of stories about people installing the OS on the box, enabling a bunch of roles, then thinking they can add 2 more VM's -all with one license.

I miss read somewhere it sounded to me like it was being said that he could only run 2 VM's on the host.

 

[boss6021]

I miss read somewhere it sounded to me like it was being said that he could only run 2 VM's on the host.

Yes, I was under the impression that I would only be able to run 2 VMs on the server with the current licensing. I then inquired if I could use the new Server 2012 standard license to upgrade the host, and then use the same license to upgrade the 2003 VM.

 

[bigdogchris]

Yes, I was under the impression that I would only be able to run 2 VMs on the server with the current licensing.

You can, as long as the physical box is only hosting the VM's. If the physical server you described is hosting 2 VM's, plus it has other Roles installed, you are out of compliance with only 1 license.

You can run the VM's (or physical box for that matter) at any downgraded bit level that you want as well, except data center, but you must run based on the VM licensing of the OS you purchased. So Server 2012 Standard license could be downgraded to run a Server 2008 R2 Enterprise box, but you're still limited to 2 VM's (rather than 4 that 2008 R2 Enterprise had). There are also some cpu limitations as well, but you only have 2 CPU's so it's compliant.

If you 'spin up' a 3rd VM to assist with the transfer, technically it's in production and is not compliant (though the two licenses allows you to have other VM's configured and ready to go as long as they are in a non-operational state). But if it's temporary and you plant on taking the old one offline, I don't see why it would be a big deal to spin up a 3rd.

 

[DeChache]

You can, as long as the physical box is only hosting the VM's. If the physical server you described is hosting 2 VM's, plus it has other Roles installed, you are out of compliance with only 1 license.

You can run the VM's (or physical box for that matter) at any downgraded bit level that you want as well, except data center, but you must run based on the VM licensing of the OS you purchased. So Server 2012 Standard license could be downgraded to run a Server 2008 R2 Enterprise box, but you're still limited to 2 VM's (rather than 4 that 2008 R2 Enterprise had). There are also some cpu limitations as well, but you only have 2 CPU's so it's compliant.

If you 'spin up' a 3rd VM to assist with the transfer, technically it's in production and is not compliant (though the two licenses allows you to have other VM's configured and ready to go as long as they are in a non-operational state). But if it's temporary and you plant on taking the old one offline, I don't see why it would be a big deal to spin up a 3rd.

I think you are talking about the license key he has for Server 2012 and the ways he can use that key. If that is the case you are correct.

But if you are talking about the total number of VMs the host can host you are wrong...

The old VM is server 2003 and should have its own key it can run for as long as he wants next to the new 2012 server

The way you wrote that is very confusing.

 

[Biznatch]

You can, as long as the physical box is only hosting the VM's. If the physical server you described is hosting 2 VM's, plus it has other Roles installed, you are out of compliance with only 1 license.

You can run the VM's (or physical box for that matter) at any downgraded bit level that you want as well, except data center, but you must run based on the VM licensing of the OS you purchased. So Server 2012 Standard license could be downgraded to run a Server 2008 R2 Enterprise box, but you're still limited to 2 VM's (rather than 4 that 2008 R2 Enterprise had). There are also some cpu limitations as well, but you only have 2 CPU's so it's compliant.

If you 'spin up' a 3rd VM to assist with the transfer, technically it's in production and is not compliant (though the two licenses allows you to have other VM's configured and ready to go as long as they are in a non-operational state). But if it's temporary and you plant on taking the old one offline, I don't see why it would be a big deal to spin up a 3rd.

I would argue the 3rd server isn't in production until the roles have been migrated, and the new server is being utilized for those roles. I would have no issue performing the upgrade like this, and you can check with an MS licensing specialist to confirm.

 

[bigdogchris]

I think you are talking about the license key he has for Server 2012 license and the ways he can use that key. If that is the case you are correct.

But if you are talking about the total number of VMs the host can host you are wrong...

The old VM is server 2003 and should have its own key it can run for as long as he wants next to the new 2012 server

The way you wrote that is very confusing.

I'm talking about buying a single Server 2012 Standard license and what you can do with it. If he has a separate Server 2003 license, then of course he can do whatever he wants with it. The way he originally described it sounded like he was using the Server 2008 R2 Standard license to host 2 VM's, one being 2003, the other being SBS 2011 (which would have to be a separate license).

Now that I look at it, knowing SBS 2011 would have to be it's own license, he would technically have a license open for another VM as long as the 2008 R2 box wasn't doing anything other than hosting the VM's.

boss6021, did you buy the SBS 2011 license separate?

I would argue the 3rd server isn't in production until the roles have been migrated, and the new server is being utilized for those roles.

I'd agree with that statement.