Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration support

[Guest thundergod255]

We inherited a client that is running a terminal server with 16 Device CALS.

The server has an application on it that is accessed by most users in the

office. I am worried that we will encounter issues soon for the following

two reasons:

 

1. While most users take their work laptop home with them, a few workers may

try to VPN and RDP to the server from their home computer. Based on my

understanding of the licensing, we will need to purchase additional CALS for

them because it is a new device.

 

2. As IT Support for the office, we have 2 or 3 techs that may have to

remote to the server from time to time for administration support. I noticed

that the licensing server has issued certificates from the computers that we

use when we remote in. Shouldn't the server have two built in licenses for

us to administrate it that is separate from the rest of the licensing?

 

This is becoming a problem because I think we are at a point where we need

more device CALS. However, it seems like there should be a work around

because 90% of the temporary licenses that are starting to be issued are from

our work computers or home computers when we access the server for support

purposes. Is there a way to prevent that type of RDP session from using a TS

Device CAL? Is the console remote session a workaround for this?

 

This client really should have been designed with per user licenses, because

they have only 12 users but from what I understand it may not be easy to

switch them. I think they have an open license, but they do not have any of

that information as their previous IT group is not available. I have read

that I may need software assurance to switch the CALS, or is there another

way?

 

In summary, I am having a hard time explaining to the client why they need

to pay $$ for more TS CALS when they have less than 16 users. When I told

them they were starting to go over and need more CALS they told me to delete

old users.

 

Thanks,

[Guest Patrick Rouse]

RE: Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration support

 

I don't think console connections consume a TSCAL.

If you have SA for your TSCALs you can call the Microsoft Clearinghouse and

they will let you switch from per device to per user licensing.

 

 

 

--

Patrick C. Rouse

Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

Systems Consultant

Quest Software, Provision Networks Division

Virtual Client Solutions

http://www.provisionnetworks.com

 

 

"thundergod255" wrote:

> We inherited a client that is running a terminal server with 16 Device CALS.

> The server has an application on it that is accessed by most users in the

> office. I am worried that we will encounter issues soon for the following

> two reasons:

>

> 1. While most users take their work laptop home with them, a few workers may

> try to VPN and RDP to the server from their home computer. Based on my

> understanding of the licensing, we will need to purchase additional CALS for

> them because it is a new device.

>

> 2. As IT Support for the office, we have 2 or 3 techs that may have to

> remote to the server from time to time for administration support. I noticed

> that the licensing server has issued certificates from the computers that we

> use when we remote in. Shouldn't the server have two built in licenses for

> us to administrate it that is separate from the rest of the licensing?

>

> This is becoming a problem because I think we are at a point where we need

> more device CALS. However, it seems like there should be a work around

> because 90% of the temporary licenses that are starting to be issued are from

> our work computers or home computers when we access the server for support

> purposes. Is there a way to prevent that type of RDP session from using a TS

> Device CAL? Is the console remote session a workaround for this?

>

> This client really should have been designed with per user licenses, because

> they have only 12 users but from what I understand it may not be easy to

> switch them. I think they have an open license, but they do not have any of

> that information as their previous IT group is not available. I have read

> that I may need software assurance to switch the CALS, or is there another

> way?

>

> In summary, I am having a hard time explaining to the client why they need

> to pay $$ for more TS CALS when they have less than 16 users. When I told

> them they were starting to go over and need more CALS they told me to delete

> old users.

>

> Thanks,

[Guest Jeff Pitsch]

Re: Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration support

 

Patrick is right, you should probably change over to per user licensing.

 

1) Yes you would need more per device cal's

2) Your admins are not connecting to the console. mstsc /console connects

directly to session 0 on Win2k3 and this does not take a license. Only one

person can be connected at a time. With remote app, you do not get the 2 +

1 free connections to the server, that is only for remote admin mode. The

license server doesn't know that the users are admins which is why it hands

out licenses when the /console option is not sued.

 

--

Jeff Pitsch

Microsoft MVP - Terminal Services

 

"thundergod255" <thundergod255@noemail.noemail> wrote in message

news:AEB2902B-7CB1-4945-B7B2-FB5FAFF5D82A@microsoft.com...

> We inherited a client that is running a terminal server with 16 Device

> CALS.

> The server has an application on it that is accessed by most users in the

> office. I am worried that we will encounter issues soon for the following

> two reasons:

>

> 1. While most users take their work laptop home with them, a few workers

> may

> try to VPN and RDP to the server from their home computer. Based on my

> understanding of the licensing, we will need to purchase additional CALS

> for

> them because it is a new device.

>

> 2. As IT Support for the office, we have 2 or 3 techs that may have to

> remote to the server from time to time for administration support. I

> noticed

> that the licensing server has issued certificates from the computers that

> we

> use when we remote in. Shouldn't the server have two built in licenses

> for

> us to administrate it that is separate from the rest of the licensing?

>

> This is becoming a problem because I think we are at a point where we need

> more device CALS. However, it seems like there should be a work around

> because 90% of the temporary licenses that are starting to be issued are

> from

> our work computers or home computers when we access the server for support

> purposes. Is there a way to prevent that type of RDP session from using a

> TS

> Device CAL? Is the console remote session a workaround for this?

>

> This client really should have been designed with per user licenses,

> because

> they have only 12 users but from what I understand it may not be easy to

> switch them. I think they have an open license, but they do not have any

> of

> that information as their previous IT group is not available. I have read

> that I may need software assurance to switch the CALS, or is there another

> way?

>

> In summary, I am having a hard time explaining to the client why they need

> to pay $$ for more TS CALS when they have less than 16 users. When I told

> them they were starting to go over and need more CALS they told me to

> delete

> old users.

>

> Thanks,

[Guest James]

RE: Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration supp

 

RE: Device Cals being "used up" when I RDP for administration supp

 

Is the only solution to avoid taking up device CALS when using our computers

for administration then is to use the console connections?

 

Is it possible to switch to per user if you do not have software insurance?

Again, I don't even know what their authorization or license codes are

because they lost all that information when they left their previous IT Group.

 

"Patrick Rouse" wrote:

> I don't think console connections consume a TSCAL.

> If you have SA for your TSCALs you can call the Microsoft Clearinghouse and

> they will let you switch from per device to per user licensing.

>

>

>

> --

> Patrick C. Rouse

> Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

> Systems Consultant

> Quest Software, Provision Networks Division

> Virtual Client Solutions

> http://www.provisionnetworks.com

>

>

> "thundergod255" wrote:

>

> > We inherited a client that is running a terminal server with 16 Device CALS.

> > The server has an application on it that is accessed by most users in the

> > office. I am worried that we will encounter issues soon for the following

> > two reasons:

> >

> > 1. While most users take their work laptop home with them, a few workers may

> > try to VPN and RDP to the server from their home computer. Based on my

> > understanding of the licensing, we will need to purchase additional CALS for

> > them because it is a new device.

> >

> > 2. As IT Support for the office, we have 2 or 3 techs that may have to

> > remote to the server from time to time for administration support. I noticed

> > that the licensing server has issued certificates from the computers that we

> > use when we remote in. Shouldn't the server have two built in licenses for

> > us to administrate it that is separate from the rest of the licensing?

> >

> > This is becoming a problem because I think we are at a point where we need

> > more device CALS. However, it seems like there should be a work around

> > because 90% of the temporary licenses that are starting to be issued are from

> > our work computers or home computers when we access the server for support

> > purposes. Is there a way to prevent that type of RDP session from using a TS

> > Device CAL? Is the console remote session a workaround for this?

> >

> > This client really should have been designed with per user licenses, because

> > they have only 12 users but from what I understand it may not be easy to

> > switch them. I think they have an open license, but they do not have any of

> > that information as their previous IT group is not available. I have read

> > that I may need software assurance to switch the CALS, or is there another

> > way?

> >

> > In summary, I am having a hard time explaining to the client why they need

> > to pay $$ for more TS CALS when they have less than 16 users. When I told

> > them they were starting to go over and need more CALS they told me to delete

> > old users.

> >

> > Thanks,