Win 2K Server: Question about Per Server licensing

T

tripex

Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Messages
854
I have a simple question:

If i set up my Windows 2000 Server with the PER SERVER licensing mode with 5 concurrent connections does that mean that only 5 computers/users will be able to connect simultaneously to fileshares and other stuff shared on the server ?
 
Win 2k server allows unlimited connection to the file shares, hardware dependent. Liscencing wont affect this.
 
Negative, you had it right. But its not just fileshares, its any type of network connection. As in 4 people with open files and one guy sending print jobs to the server would constitute 5 active connections (AFAIK). Which would mean the next guy gets turned away. http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sam/lic_cal.mspx#perserver. Why per server if you dont mind me asking? Thats normally left for servers that have very specific uses where you know exactly how many people will be connecting to it. Otherwise, per seat is way to go. It depends on number of servers and workstations of course. I'll try to find that old calculator MS has to determine best scenario...
 
doh, I stand corrected. I didnt think the lack of cals would physically limit connections, just the legality of them.
 
You could be seen as technically right, if you just typed in a huge number of cals. :) Then if you think you might come close to the limit, but very rarely, you'd be safe. This is of course illegal. :)
 
I see, so, instead of 5 i should have typed 50000...

Can i change it now?


And does this work the same on Windows 2003 Server?
I have a different server to play around and it comes with the original Microsoft sticker which says "Windows 2003 Std Server 1-4 CPU 5Clt".
 
What you should do is plug in the exact number of cals that you have to be legit. :) For your test server, plug in whatever cals because I assume its purely for testing and who cares what its set to since you will wipe it later. You can add cals by using the license manager in the control panel. You just need to have the licenses to back it up if you get audited, etc. Same for 2003. And instead of typing 5000 you really can just choose per seat/device/user (depending on Windows version). Then the server doesn't refuse any connections because it assumes a CAL has been purchased for every workstation on the network.
 
I've always chosen per seat...even back in the NT 4.0 days. Assuming your network/company is configured with licenses for the clients, this is the easiest method to choose.
 
Yep, as long as the computers connecting to the server have licenses, Per Seat is the way to go.
 
What do you mean "as long as the computers connecting to the server have licenses" ?

How do i put a license on a regular workstation running Win98, Win2000 or WinXP ?
 
tripex said:
sexy bumpage
Click to expand...

Quite sexy. :p You don't install licenses, you just have to own them on a piece of paper in a drawer somewhere. The server assumes you have done your job and taken care of it.
 
OldPueblo said:
Quite sexy. :p You don't install licenses, you just have to own them on a piece of paper in a drawer somewhere. The server assumes you have done your job and taken care of it.
Click to expand...
Sorta. When you buy win2k/winxp, you are actually buying a CAL for that station as well ( if I remember correctly ).

Hence, you need to buy cals for any 9x stations you may have ( and procede directly to jail. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 bucks ).

In either case, I find the whole idea of CALs very distasteful. It's intentionally and superficially crippling a product, which just annoys me to no end. Yes, I know it's a common practice in the industry, and yes, I dislike Cisco and Intel and AMD for practicing it. Especially Cisco.

But anyway. Don't mind me. ;)
 
XOR != OR said:
Sorta. When you buy win2k/winxp, you are actually buying a CAL for that station as well ( if I remember correctly ).

Hence, you need to buy cals for any 9x stations you may have ( and procede directly to jail. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 bucks ).

In either case, I find the whole idea of CALs very distasteful. It's intentionally and superficially crippling a product, which just annoys me to no end. Yes, I know it's a common practice in the industry, and yes, I dislike Cisco and Intel and AMD for practicing it. Especially Cisco.

But anyway. Don't mind me. ;)
Click to expand...

I think Novell does it as well. And no, XP and 2K don't come with server client cals. They still need to be bought per any workstation/device or for a user if you are doing 2003. If you do per device, even your pocketpc accessing the server needs a cal!!
 
"And no, XP and 2K don't come with server client cals"

HUH? Now im confused, what are "server client cals" ??
 
Here's the dealio. I'll give you a scenario. Say I have an office that just purchased a server and 10 workstations. For the server I chose to go with Windows Server 2003 and for the Workstations I went with XP Pro. I have to buy 1 copy of Windows Server 2003 for the server and 10 copies of XP Pro, one for each workstation. Those are the operating system licenses. Now when using an MS server, you also have to buy what are called "Client Access Licenses" (CALs). These are basically "permission" to access a resource on the server. Win2k3 comes with 5 free ones, but I would need to buy 5 more to equal 10, one per workstation. I then set my server in per device mode with 10 licenses, and all 10 can connect at once. If I add another XP workstation to the mix, I need to buy one more CAL to stay legit. Make sense? Its another way for MS to make money basically.
 
Wow, thanks OldPueblo, i understand it now. And what a suckage it is...


Tell me, is it the same way with Windows 2000 Server?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top