Server 2016 licensing

[Bev]

I am in the process of getting quotes for a new server.

 

I've had 3 quotes, and 3 very different options for the licensing side, and I'm a little confused.

 

We already have an Microsoft Open Value Subscription-Education Solutions Agreement

MicrosoftDesktopEducation AllLng License/SoftwareAssurancePack Academic OLV 1License LevelE Enterprise 1Year

 

 

Quote 1: 8x BSSPRD-967 - WinSvrSTDCore 2016 SNGL MVL 2Lic CoreLic - 9EM-00264 £160.00

 

 

 

Quote 2:

1 Windows Server Std Core 2016 Academic Licence - £241.50 £241.50

200 Windows 2016 Device CAL - Academic £3.38 £676.00

TOTAL £917

 

 

Quote 3:

Windows Server 2016 Academic Licensing 1 £243.17 £243.17

Windows Server 2016 Student Client Access License (Per User) 750 £0.77 £580.00

Windows Server 2016 Staff Client Access License (Per User) 75 £8.09 £607.00

Total £1430

 

 

The first quote is from a company I deal with often, and if I hadn't had the other quotes I would have assumed it correct and accepted it but after receiving the other 2 quotes I am now completely confused about exactly which licenses I do need?

 

As you can see, there is a huge difference!

 

Thanks for your advice

[Steve21]

That depends on your cores etc on your server for 2016 (and number of VMs). But in general the CALs should all be under your current OVS/ESS etc

 

What's the new server going to have as 8 cores seems low for a new server, unless it's small school etc (or not using VMs?)

 

Steve

[LeMarchand]

I don't think anyone understands how to license MS stuff! I'd be tempted to go for the cheapest, as long as you have a paper trail covering you, and then blame them if MS come a'calling.

 

More seriously, is it one sole server with no VMs or a host + a number of VMs? Are the CALs already included in whatever agreement you have for other MS stuff? (If you have one).

 

It was my understanding that if you have more than a certain number of VMs a Datacentre license works out cheaper, but that loophole may have been closed.

[Bev]

VM - Virtual Machine? We don't currently have any.

 

It's a large middle school, with 750 students, but that would be small if you are used to a high school.

 

The first quote is from the company that sold us the OVS agreement, so it would make sense that they would know we already have that and don't need to buy it again.

[Steve21]

Aye in that case you'll want the bare minimum, the 8x Std would allow 16 core (the minimum per server you can license is 16 for 2016)

 

Just wondered why a low core count if it's for large number in regards to my query Assumed it was going to be a new VM host etc (As Std won't let you have many VMs)

 

Steve

[LeMarchand]

VM - Virtual Machine? We don't currently have any.

 

It's a large middle school, with 750 students, but that would be small if you are used to a high school.

 

The first quote is from the company that sold us the OVS agreement, so it would make sense that they would know we already have that and don't need to buy it again.

 

VM does = Virtual Machine.

 

I've got a Primary with c.200 students with Virtual Servers, and my other similarly-sized school would be the same if a governor hadn't held up the process by asking pointless questions. (Hopefully this summer...). My Junior (c. 300) also has a number of Virtual Servers. All just have one physical host, unfortunately.

 

I'd strongly advise looking into segregating and virtualising some of your server roles. For not a lot extra, it's a godsend - if for no other reason than being able to reboot just that server in the middle of the day (obviously depending on what it's doing!) and not taking everything down. You'd probably have to factor in costs for a more robust backup solution though.

 

P.S. Agree with @Steve21 about the licensing for a sole physical machine.

[KK20]

2016 is more expensive to licence for most poeple who have modern CPU. Older servers with 16 cores total should (in theory) be the same price. If you are moving to multiple servers and intend on making a cluster, rememeber than you need to licence each server for the potential maxium VMs that could run.

 

scenario. You have a 2cpu 8 core per cpu server. you have 8 VMS. The host server does not have additional roles other than required to run the VMs (I believe backup software is allowed as long as it is for backing up the VMs). You will need 16 core licences x8 -128 core licences to correctly licence the server. But each 2016 std licence covers you for 2xVMs so the count drops to 64core licences needed. so you will need 64 core worth of server std 2016 licences (sold in 2 or 16 packs). (source - Table Page 9 - Introduction to Per Core Licensing and Basic Definitions, April 2017 - microsoft)

 

scenario. You have a 2cpu 10 core per cpu server. you have 8 VMS. The host server does not have additional roles other than required to run the VMs (I believe backup software is allowed as long as it is for backing up the VMs). You will need 20 core licences x8 -160 core licences to correctly licence the server. But each 2016 std licence covers you for 2xVMs so the count drops to 80 core licences needed. so you will need 80 core worth of server std 2016 licences (sold in 2 or 16 packs). (source - Table Page 9 - Introduction to Per Core Licensing and Basic Definitions, April 2017 - microsoft)

 

If you have a 2 node cluster using the TWO servers above, you would need 144 core worth equivalent in total: 80 cores for 8VMs on one server and 64 cores for 8VMs on the other.

 

Cores can also come in 2 or 16 packs. Spreadsheet ahoy on working those out. I dont have the prices so im not sure on how much things cost. The PDF on microsoft licensing says that the prices for 8x2core and 1x16 core is the same. P26 of Microsoft Commercial Licensing reference guide for Windows Server 2016 state that 4x2pack 2016 is the same price as 1xserver 2012R2 licence. Your mileage may vary of course....

 

Datacenter edition on a 16 core server would remain the same cost (in theory). I think the break even point is now 13 VMs not 10 based on a 16 core server. Unlike 2012R2 datacenter also comes with features not found on server 2012R2 such as stretch cluster with storage direct. This may be something smaller entities could leverage as it brings into reach true redundancy spread between multiple buildings based on "cheapish" storage. It is also allegedly more reliable than the old hyper-v cold replica (however that is another story).

Edited February 26, 2018 by KK20