On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Joe Heaton<jhea...@etp.ca.gov> wrote: > Does every server have to have CALs for everyone in your organization?
Well, technically speaking, servers don't need CALs at all, clients do. :) Every "client" that is "accessing" a server needs a CAL. In this context, "client" can be defined as a "user" (a particular, individual person) or a "device" (a particular computer, thin client, PDA, mobile phone, or whatever). For Windows Server itself, CALs can be assigned to the server or to clients. If assigned to the server, they are used per concurrent connection. If assigned to a client, they are good for any servers the client connects to. > For instance, if I have a server that I use for network tools, for the most > part, do I have to have CALS for everyone, or just the people that would be > accessing it? Technically, just the people that would be accessing that server. Be careful, though; that means you can't use that server for anything else that anyone without a CAL might need. But if you've got more than one server, you're almost certainly better off assigning CALs per client. A CAL assigned to a given client is good for any number of servers. Or are you faced with having %LARGE_NUMBER% of CALs for an older server release, but some new software product needs a newer server release, and you don't want to buy new CALs for *everyone*. > ... what about my AV server? Clients almost certainly make authenticated connections to the AV server, so they all need CALs. > Only a handful of people directly access it. Microsoft's licenses go to lengths to make it clear that direct or indirect, multiplexed, etc., doesn't matter. It's authenticated use that's the determining factor. > Or my webfilter server, only a handful of people access it. I would assume "everyone" uses the webfilter server to get to the web? :) -- Ben ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
