Yet another licensing question

[locans]

All,

Well I have a headach after browsing thru licensing Q&A's, so here it goes.

Cuatomer has a W2k server(OEM)15 CAL's running SQL server 2000(15 CAL). This unit is currently the AD controller. Due to performance and space issues we purchased a new server. The new server has 2003R2. We are moving SQl to this new server and It will only be a member of the domain. The OEM licensing came with 5 CAL's and We purchased an additional 10 Cal's. I have been told that the CAL's are not needed for this server as it is not a Primary or backup AD controller.

If I understand the info from MS I need CAL's for the number of users accessing server services on this machine. I assume that this would include the SQL server so 15 server CAL's AND 15 SQL CAL's are requires on this machine.

Thanks for your assistance.

Locans

 

[mrdenny]

The CALs go with the users, not with the server. However CALs are version specific, so you will need to purchase Windows 2003 R2 CALs to cover all users who will be connecting to the server.

The SQL CALs are still in effect provided that you are still using SQL 2000 on the new server.

Denny
MCSA (2003) / MCDBA (SQL 2000) / MCTS (SQL 2005)

--Anything is possible. All it takes is a little research. (Me)

http://www.mrdenny.com

 

[captaincrunch00]

Call 1-800-MICROSOFT and get your answers from people who are correct. Get it in writing from them if you can.

The CALs are on the server, but they allow clients to connect legally...
If people connect to the 2003 server, you need CALs. They'll connect to SQL on a 2003 server, so you need SQL and 2003 Server CALs.

You arent changing SQL from 2000 to anything else, so you're fine there.

You do need 2003 CALs though because people are connecting to that server in any way, shape, or form.