Microsoft Licensing Primer
-
It would actually be 12, if you have 13 you have to buy the licenses for 14
-
@brianlittlejohn said:
It would actually be 12, if you have 13 you have to buy the licenses for 14
Duh, of course. Late on a Friday, needing some beer here, I guess.
-
@scottalanmiller Thats what I'm about to do, either craft beer or wine. My friends are having a make you own pasta night... so im leaning towards wine unless I see a beer I cant do without.
-
I've got a single beer left in the fridge. Doubt that I am going to walk to the store for more, though.
-
I have an almost full bottle of sake to tide me over tonight.
First snow is about to arrive in Chicagoland. The kids are excited.
-
Went to the store and ended up with wine and beer...
-
I should probably do that. I think that we've lost track of this thread now.
-
That 12 VMs isn't just 12 on a single host for normal operations - if the plan is to move VMs around for failover, you're down to a max of 6 on each server before buying DC makes sense.
-
@Dashrender said:
That 12 VMs isn't just 12 on a single host for normal operations - if the plan is to move VMs around for failover, you're down to a max of 6 on each server before buying DC makes sense.
Correct you are. IF you have DR needs, the numbers change a lot.
-
Yeah take that beer talk elsewhere, LOL.
-
@Dashrender said:
That 12 VMs isn't just 12 on a single host for normal operations - if the plan is to move VMs around for failover, you're down to a max of 6 on each server before buying DC makes sense.
Yea, we were talking about the most that can run on a machine including all DR/Maintenance issues.
-
@brianlittlejohn said:
@Dashrender said:
That 12 VMs isn't just 12 on a single host for normal operations - if the plan is to move VMs around for failover, you're down to a max of 6 on each server before buying DC makes sense.
Yea, we were talking about the most that can run on a machine including all DR/Maintenance issues.
In that case, you're limited to 6 VMs per host otherwise you're better off buying DC for each server.
-
@Dashrender said:
@brianlittlejohn said:
@Dashrender said:
That 12 VMs isn't just 12 on a single host for normal operations - if the plan is to move VMs around for failover, you're down to a max of 6 on each server before buying DC makes sense.
Yea, we were talking about the most that can run on a machine including all DR/Maintenance issues.
In that case, you're limited to 6 VMs per host otherwise you're better off buying DC for each server.
Only if you want them to float individually. If you only move them at the time of a system failure, the licenses would migrate to the new host with you.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@brianlittlejohn said:
@Dashrender said:
That 12 VMs isn't just 12 on a single host for normal operations - if the plan is to move VMs around for failover, you're down to a max of 6 on each server before buying DC makes sense.
Yea, we were talking about the most that can run on a machine including all DR/Maintenance issues.
In that case, you're limited to 6 VMs per host otherwise you're better off buying DC for each server.
Only if you want them to float individually. If you only move them at the time of a system failure, the licenses would migrate to the new host with you.
The point is that moving the license at time of failure means you are restricted to every 90 days. This discussion is around where the cut over is to be basically as flexible as datacenter, yet not purchasing datacenter.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@brianlittlejohn said:
@Dashrender said:
That 12 VMs isn't just 12 on a single host for normal operations - if the plan is to move VMs around for failover, you're down to a max of 6 on each server before buying DC makes sense.
Yea, we were talking about the most that can run on a machine including all DR/Maintenance issues.
In that case, you're limited to 6 VMs per host otherwise you're better off buying DC for each server.
Only if you want them to float individually. If you only move them at the time of a system failure, the licenses would migrate to the new host with you.
Also, in addition to JB's post, You can't move them back after the failure is resolved for 90 days, legally. If you can afford to live without the second server for those 90 days, then why have the second server in first place, just build a better single server.
-
On the server side, this would also be a good use for SA in smaller environments as you are allowed to have a cold boot server for DR purposes, right?
-
How would you have a cold server? The VM host itself? You don't need SA for a turned off Hyper-V host... and the VMs are useless in a cold state, they would not be up to date, so they are pointless.
-
@BRRABill said:
On the server side, this would also be a good use for SA in smaller environments as you are allowed to have a cold boot server for DR purposes, right?
Normal backups are considered cold. You never need a license for a cold system. That's just a copy on disk.
-
Looks like this got covered. Licensing is only needed for warm and hot spares, not cold ones.
-
What about in my Datto example?
Every hour there are incremental backups made, and appended to the image. Once a day it boots it to be sure it is bootable, then kills the VM. Or, in the case of DR, I can boot the VM, and have it up and running on the network within minutes.
Wouldn't that be considered a cold boot DR server?
From the MS definition:
Backup for Disaster Recovery provides additional licenses for servers used as offline (“cold”) backups, to help you recover in case of a catastrophic event. Cold backups help users regain access to critical data and applications following disasters and help protect the mission-critical solutions of your organization. For each server license you have with Software Assurance, you have the right to install the same software product on a “cold” backup server for disaster recovery.
