Windows Server 2012 R2 Licensing
-
@scottalanmiller now i get it. thanks a lot
-
No problem. Keep in mind that with Windows 2016, the additional complication of core licensing is being added. Windows 2012 R2 is simple by comparison.
-
@scottalanmiller yes i read that,, i am just a bit confused about the hyper v server core , and hyper v in windows server..
if i use Hyper v server core, how many licenses do i need, have you got a clue?
-
@Alket_tux said in windows server 2012 r2 licensing:
@scottalanmiller yes i read that,, i am just a bit confused about the hyper v server core , and hyper v in windows server..
if i use Hyper v server core, how many licenses do i need, have you got a clue?
There is only one Hyper-V, and it is free. Always free, no matter what. Hyper-V has no licensing, there is no possible way to pay for Hyper-V.
If you use Windows to deploy Hyper-V, which you should never do because that's just bad practice and causes other problems, you have deployed Windows, obviously, and you must license that as usual.
-
This resource might be helpful:
https://mangolassi.it/topic/5272/somethings-you-need-to-know-about-hyperv
-
@scottalanmiller yes i get that what i am asking is:
i have hyper v installed on my 4 processor server, on top of it i install a windows server 2012 r2 standart, i assign to it only one processor..
in this case i need only one licence ? -
@Alket_tux said in windows server 2012 r2 licensing:
@scottalanmiller yes i get that what i am asking is:
i have hyper v installed on my 4 processor server, on top of it i install a windows server 2012 r2 standart, i assign to it only one processor..
in this case i need only one licence ?No....
Four processors, one VM = 2 Standard Licenses
-
@scottalanmiller so you are saying that it does not depend on the fact that the VM is virtualized,
-
@Alket_tux said in windows server 2012 r2 licensing:
@scottalanmiller so you are saying that it does not depend on the fact that the VM is virtualized,
Correct, there is only... how many VMs, how many processors. That's it. The amount of RAM, assigned vCPUs and such have nothing to do with Windows licensing. Virtualization is the only enterprise deployment method so all licensing is designed assuming that already, it's not a weird exception to normal licensing, it's the majority case.
-
The windows licenses apply to the physical machine, everytime you add another fully licensed copy of Server 2012r2 (2 Server 2012 Standard licenses in the case of 4 processors) you can legally run another 2 windows VMs.
If you only had two processors instead of 4, for every standard license you would get 2 vms, so if you bought two standard licenses you could run 4 vms legally.
-
@brianlittlejohn thanks, i have another question, if i install windows 2012 r2 standart on my bare metal server with 2 processors, and i enable hyper v as a role:
1- I need one licence as there are 2 processors ?
2- do i get to have 2 virtual machines (WS 2012 r2 Standart) for free? -
@Alket_tux said in windows server 2012 r2 licensing:
@brianlittlejohn thanks, i have another question, if i install windows 2012 r2 standart on my bare metal server with 2 processors, and i enable hyper v as a role:
Under no conditions should you ever do this!!
All this does is make your system have more overhead, increase risk and make it harder to deal with in the future. There are no benefits but major problems. It's an anti-best practice and should be absolutely avoided.
-
@Alket_tux said in windows server 2012 r2 licensing:
@brianlittlejohn thanks, i have another question, if i install windows 2012 r2 standart on my bare metal server with 2 processors, and i enable hyper v as a role:
1- I need one licence as there are 2 processors ?
Correct, but don't do it.
-
@Alket_tux said in windows server 2012 r2 licensing:
@brianlittlejohn thanks, i have another question, if i install windows 2012 r2 standart on my bare metal server with 2 processors, and i enable hyper v as a role:
2- do i get to have 2 virtual machines (WS 2012 r2 Standart) for free?
Yes, no matter how you install Hyper-V, the licensing stays the same. But this should never happen. Here is what happens under the hood...
- Hyper-V installs to the bare metal and removes Windows
- The Windows Server that you installed becomes a VM that "looks" physical
- You have the same licensing as always, so you may use up to two Windows VMs
- You may "not use" the VM that you just created (literally, you can't touch it, no installing anything on it that isn't needed for Hyper-V - it's useless to you, now you have a "dead" VM that you basically have to manage but can't use taking up resources.
- You may use two Windows VMs. Either the one that you just created and one more, or you can leave the one and make two more. No matter what you do, you can only use two VMs.
So as you can see, you would never install this way as it just makes a mess for no reason.
-
@scottalanmiller so which is your suggestion?
suppose i am planning of creating a small virtual environment.. what would you recommend me?
how should i install hyper-v?thanks
-
@Alket_tux said in windows server 2012 r2 licensing:
how should i install hyper-v?
Simply download Hyper-V itself directly, no Windows Server, and install it alone. Then build your VMs on top of it.
-
This is the download link for Hyper-V 2016:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/evaluate-hyper-v-server-2016
It is totally free. The "evaluation" is unlimited. There is no other form of Hyper-V.
-
@scottalanmiller said in windows server 2012 r2 licensing:
This is the download link for Hyper-V 2016:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/evaluate-hyper-v-server-2016
It is totally free. The "evaluation" is unlimited. There is no other form of Hyper-V.
This needs to be stated again. MS makes this very confusing. It looks like this is just a trial, but it's not. There is no time limit or other limitations to the use of this software.
-
Need some tags on this thread.
-
Updated
