Do I need extra CALs for this setup?

[sparkeh]

We are currently at a stage where we have a 2008 R2 server hosting our virtual 2003 DC via Hyper-V. The 2008 server doesn't interact with the domain and only hosts the virtual DC so doesn't need CALs.

If I was to run up a virtual copy of 2008 R2 and use it to host some imaging solution (WDS, WDT, SCCM or something) would I need extra CALs?

The server would only be deploying XP, after this they would interact with the 2003 DC and I can't work out if that needs CALs or not.

[sparkeh]

Hmm I am guessing that I do:

a Windows Server 2008 Client Access License (CAL) is required for each user or device (or combination of both) that accesses or uses the Windows Server 2008 or Windows Server 2008 R2 server software

[localzuk]

Are you using user or device cals?

We buy 300 device cals, and run 12 servers. What CALs are you thinking you need?

[powdarrmonkey]

If I was to run up a virtual copy of 2008 R2 and use it to host some imaging solution (WDS, WDT, SCCM or something) would I need extra CALs?

Yes. (at least, as certainly as the big MS allow us to think.)

[sparkeh]

Device CALs. We are currently covered for all our devices with CALs for the 2003 server.

Just trying to figure out if I need to buy 2008 CALs for the devices if all it is going to be doing is deploying images, but looks like I do.
I guess people will think 'why wouldn't you need them?' but I wondered what the actual licence terms were, i.e. if it was a full windows client that required a CAL and if WinPE needed one.

However if appears that every 'device' that uses the server software needs one.

[sparkeh]

Yes. (at least, as certainly as the big MS allow us to think.)

Heh heh duly noted

[powdarrmonkey]

I guess people will think 'why wouldn't you need them?' but I wondered what the actual licence terms were, i.e. if it was a full windows client that required a CAL and if WinPE needed one.

You do - it doesn't matter if it's a human or a machine requesting services from the server, that action requires a license. (similar to how it doesn't matter if you're doing something useful or surfing eBay )

[Ric_]

@sparkeh: You definitiely would need 2008 CALs for all your machines. In addition, you would need SCCM CALs if you chose that as your deployment method. Of course, 2003 also has WDS and is capable of running SCCM.

[jamin100]

ok, sorry to butt in on this thread but I have a quick cal related question.

Say i have 150 machines and 2 Windows 2008 servers. How many cals would i need? 150 or 300?

[RabbieBurns]

If you run windows 2008 datacenter edition you can have unlimited virtual machines running under it with no extra licensing required, as long as you use hyper-v and not vmware etc.

[teejay]

If you run windows 2008 datacenter edition you can have unlimited virtual machines running under it with no extra licensing required, as long as you use hyper-v and not vmware etc.

Actually this applies to any virtualisation software, its not limited to hyper-v.

[RabbieBurns]

You sure? Im sure I read / was told somewhere it was only valid with Hyper-V. Ill need to double check, cheers.

edit: Seems you are right.. doesnt stipulate it here: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...atacenter.aspx

[teejay]

100% postitive.
If MS tried limiting it only to Hyper V, they would be in court the next day and have anti-competitive action against them by the EU and US governments.

See here

[RTS]

ok, sorry to butt in on this thread but I have a quick cal related question.

Say i have 150 machines and 2 Windows 2008 servers. How many cals would i need? 150 or 300?

Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Licensing Guide should answer your query.