I can't even
-
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@dashrender said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@bnrstnr said in I can't even:
How the F does a turned off computer/VM need to be licensed? Does this mean that full backups of VMs each need their own licenses?! If so, I'm so screwed on licenses...
No, just Hyper-V Replicas.
Whatever you are replicating in Hyper-V Manager that is actually a Hyper-V Replica...
A huge key here...
Hyper-V Replica requires a license.
A Hyper-V replica does not.Semantics, that capital letter matters.
So use Veeam to replicate and you're golden.
Correct.
If you have Hyper-V HOST1 and Hyper-V HOST2, and you replicate VM1 between them, you need a license for the replica, no matter what.
And if you back up VM1 to BACKUPSERV1, no license needed. The backup of VM1 is not a Hyper-V Replica, it's just a "dumb" .vhdx file you can't do anything with, and is not "attached" to Hyper-V Replication.
-
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@dashrender said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@bnrstnr said in I can't even:
How the F does a turned off computer/VM need to be licensed? Does this mean that full backups of VMs each need their own licenses?! If so, I'm so screwed on licenses...
No, just Hyper-V Replicas.
Whatever you are replicating in Hyper-V Manager that is actually a Hyper-V Replica...
A huge key here...
Hyper-V Replica requires a license.
A Hyper-V replica does not.Semantics, that capital letter matters.
So use Veeam to replicate and you're golden.
Correct.
If you have Hyper-V HOST1 and Hyper-V HOST2, and you replicate VM1 between them, you need a license for the replica, no matter what.
And if you back up VM1 to BACKUPSERV1, no license needed. The backup of VM1 is not a Hyper-V Replica, it's just a "dumb" .vhdx file you can't do anything with, and is not "attached" to Hyper-V Replication.
In this scenario, there are 3 VM1.vhdx files. Two of them are in Hyper-V replication of one-another. The third is not.
-
@scottalanmiller said
but they always include the assumption that you will turn it on.
If a server is in the woods, but is never turned on, is it really a server?
-
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@dashrender said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@bnrstnr said in I can't even:
How the F does a turned off computer/VM need to be licensed? Does this mean that full backups of VMs each need their own licenses?! If so, I'm so screwed on licenses...
No, just Hyper-V Replicas.
Whatever you are replicating in Hyper-V Manager that is actually a Hyper-V Replica...
A huge key here...
Hyper-V Replica requires a license.
A Hyper-V replica does not.Semantics, that capital letter matters.
So use Veeam to replicate and you're golden.
Correct.
If you have Hyper-V HOST1 and Hyper-V HOST2, and you replicate VM1 between them, you need a license for the replica, no matter what.
Not quite. There are many ways that I can replicate a VM to another server that do not involve using the built in replication method.
It is very specifically the use of the Hyper-V Replication function within Hyper-V that requires SA to be allowed to replicate a VM to another server.
-
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@dashrender said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
Everyone states that you need a license, but they always include the assumption that you will turn it on. I've searched and never found any MS statements that say that backups in that state need a license. I have a feeling it's not needed for Hyper-V Replica, either.
So, what does SA give you in this situation then?
The ability to fire it up.
Incorrect. You do gain that allowance also. But SA also grants you the use of the Hyper-V Replication functions to create the replica.
-
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@dashrender said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@bnrstnr said in I can't even:
How the F does a turned off computer/VM need to be licensed? Does this mean that full backups of VMs each need their own licenses?! If so, I'm so screwed on licenses...
No, just Hyper-V Replicas.
Whatever you are replicating in Hyper-V Manager that is actually a Hyper-V Replica...
A huge key here...
Hyper-V Replica requires a license.
A Hyper-V replica does not.Semantics, that capital letter matters.
So use Veeam to replicate and you're golden.
Correct.
If you have Hyper-V HOST1 and Hyper-V HOST2, and you replicate VM1 between them, you need a license for the replica, no matter what.
What do you mean? You absolutely don't need any license for what you described. The act of replication never requires a license from MS - no matter what. That's not something that MS licenses.
-
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@dashrender said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@bnrstnr said in I can't even:
How the F does a turned off computer/VM need to be licensed? Does this mean that full backups of VMs each need their own licenses?! If so, I'm so screwed on licenses...
No, just Hyper-V Replicas.
Whatever you are replicating in Hyper-V Manager that is actually a Hyper-V Replica...
A huge key here...
Hyper-V Replica requires a license.
A Hyper-V replica does not.Semantics, that capital letter matters.
So use Veeam to replicate and you're golden.
Correct.
If you have Hyper-V HOST1 and Hyper-V HOST2, and you replicate VM1 between them, you need a license for the replica, no matter what.
And if you back up VM1 to BACKUPSERV1, no license needed. The backup of VM1 is not a Hyper-V Replica, it's just a "dumb" .vhdx file you can't do anything with, and is not "attached" to Hyper-V Replication.
Replica and Dumb file are the same thing. Replica is just a name for a dumb file that includes the entirety of the source in its original format. Once it is anything but that, it's more than a replica.
-
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@dashrender said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
@bnrstnr said in I can't even:
How the F does a turned off computer/VM need to be licensed? Does this mean that full backups of VMs each need their own licenses?! If so, I'm so screwed on licenses...
No, just Hyper-V Replicas.
Whatever you are replicating in Hyper-V Manager that is actually a Hyper-V Replica...
A huge key here...
Hyper-V Replica requires a license.
A Hyper-V replica does not.Semantics, that capital letter matters.
So use Veeam to replicate and you're golden.
Correct.
If you have Hyper-V HOST1 and Hyper-V HOST2, and you replicate VM1 between them, you need a license for the replica, no matter what.
And if you back up VM1 to BACKUPSERV1, no license needed. The backup of VM1 is not a Hyper-V Replica, it's just a "dumb" .vhdx file you can't do anything with, and is not "attached" to Hyper-V Replication.
In this scenario, there are 3 VM1.vhdx files. Two of them are in Hyper-V replication of one-another. The third is not.
All are replicas equally. Replica, backup, dumb file... all one and the same. The concepts of one server being Hyper-V and one being a backup server are purely human designations. Every Hyper-V server can store backups (replicas) and any given backup server might run on Hyper-V.
All of these things overlap.
To show it another way, since it is ONLY a replica on the second Hyper-V server, just called it a backup server, because it is. Does that explain why no license is needed? The Hyper-V server is a backup server, too.
-
I was actually consulting on a backup design just yesterday where we were using Hyper-V in exactly this way as a backup target, but building the backup system using Starwind. It was a backup device in every way, no expectation of VMs to run there, no live systems ever, just Hyper-V + Starwind used to handle the replica-based file backups.
-
@jaredbusch said in I can't even:
It is very specifically the use of the Hyper-V Replication function within Hyper-V that requires SA to be allowed to replicate a VM to another server.
Do you have the reference on that? I've heard it so much that I keep assuming that it is true, but I realized today that I've not been able to actually find anything that says that. It's all something I've heard from a third party and I wonder if it isn't the same misquoting that we get about replicas in general.
-
@brrabill said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said
but they always include the assumption that you will turn it on.
If a server is in the woods, but is never turned on, is it really a server?
Nope, and that's the rub. It's just metal.
-
So, the guy who talks directly to Microsoft to ask these very questions is incorrect?
http://www.aidanfinn.com/?p=11837Windows Server 8 Hyper-V Replica, Veeam, Etc With Hosting Companies
If you replicate a VM from your licensed hosts to a hosting company of some sort using Hyper-V Replica (Windows Server
or one of the plethora of 3rd party alternatives, then you need to license the installation of Windows that is in each replica VM ā¦ even if it is powered off or locked in a replicating state. Donāt bother with any of the usual āitās not being usedā or āitās only being replicatedā arguments ā¦ it needs a license so thatās that.A benefit of Software Assurance is Cold Back-ups for Disaster Recovery. This means that if you license your hosts (and thus your guest OSs if correctly licensed with Enterprise/Datacenter editions) with SA, then you get a benefit of licensing for the cold backup copy. The alternative is to not buy SA for the host/guests and have to buy full licenses for the offline replicas. This benefit allows your primary site to go offline and to power up the replicas during a catastrophic event. You can do this without doing anything to activate the benefit or without communicating with Microsoft.
-
@tim_g said in I can't even:
So, the guy who talks directly to Microsoft to ask these very questions is incorrect?
Windows Server 8 Hyper-V Replica, Veeam, Etc With Hosting Companies
If you replicate a VM from your licensed hosts to a hosting company of some sort using Hyper-V Replica (Windows Server
or one of the plethora of 3rd party alternatives, then you need to license the installation of Windows that is in each replica VM ā¦ even if it is powered off or locked in a replicating state. Donāt bother with any of the usual āitās not being usedā or āitās only being replicatedā arguments ā¦ it needs a license so thatās that.A benefit of Software Assurance is Cold Back-ups for Disaster Recovery. This means that if you license your hosts (and thus your guest OSs if correctly licensed with Enterprise/Datacenter editions) with SA, then you get a benefit of licensing for the cold backup copy. The alternative is to not buy SA for the host/guests and have to buy full licenses for the offline replicas. This benefit allows your primary site to go offline and to power up the replicas during a catastrophic event. You can do this without doing anything to activate the benefit or without communicating with Microsoft.
Who are you quoting here, and I'm assuming you're stating they are wrong?
-
@dustinb3403 said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
So, the guy who talks directly to Microsoft to ask these very questions is incorrect?
Windows Server 8 Hyper-V Replica, Veeam, Etc With Hosting Companies
If you replicate a VM from your licensed hosts to a hosting company of some sort using Hyper-V Replica (Windows Server
or one of the plethora of 3rd party alternatives, then you need to license the installation of Windows that is in each replica VM ā¦ even if it is powered off or locked in a replicating state. Donāt bother with any of the usual āitās not being usedā or āitās only being replicatedā arguments ā¦ it needs a license so thatās that.A benefit of Software Assurance is Cold Back-ups for Disaster Recovery. This means that if you license your hosts (and thus your guest OSs if correctly licensed with Enterprise/Datacenter editions) with SA, then you get a benefit of licensing for the cold backup copy. The alternative is to not buy SA for the host/guests and have to buy full licenses for the offline replicas. This benefit allows your primary site to go offline and to power up the replicas during a catastrophic event. You can do this without doing anything to activate the benefit or without communicating with Microsoft.
Who are you quoting here, and I'm assuming you're stating they are wrong?
Sorry the link didn't paste. I edited it in.
-
@tim_g said in I can't even:
So, the guy who talks directly to Microsoft to ask these very questions is incorrect?
http://www.aidanfinn.com/?p=11837Windows Server 8 Hyper-V Replica, Veeam, Etc With Hosting Companies
If you replicate a VM from your licensed hosts to a hosting company of some sort using Hyper-V Replica (Windows Server
or one of the plethora of 3rd party alternatives, then you need to license the installation of Windows that is in each replica VM ā¦ even if it is powered off or locked in a replicating state. Donāt bother with any of the usual āitās not being usedā or āitās only being replicatedā arguments ā¦ it needs a license so thatās that.A benefit of Software Assurance is Cold Back-ups for Disaster Recovery. This means that if you license your hosts (and thus your guest OSs if correctly licensed with Enterprise/Datacenter editions) with SA, then you get a benefit of licensing for the cold backup copy. The alternative is to not buy SA for the host/guests and have to buy full licenses for the offline replicas. This benefit allows your primary site to go offline and to power up the replicas during a catastrophic event. You can do this without doing anything to activate the benefit or without communicating with Microsoft.
That's the misinformation I'm talking about. MS never says anything about that. And it is obviously not true as it means things like Veeam can't be used.
This is beyond question, incorrect information. That much we know for a fact. There is nothing from MS that suggests anything of the sort and if they did, it would be the instant end of Windows.
-
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/C/5/6C576C0C-F740-48E2-86E1-25B15BE23879/dr_brief.doc
This is a useful doc. A lot of people say that this is the source of why you need SA for replicas, but it is pretty clear that this is the very document that implies that you don't - as it makes it clear that you only need SA once you intend to use the replica for DR (where DR is MS' code for going live.) Until such time as you intend to make it running, no licensing is needed.
-
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
@tim_g said in I can't even:
So, the guy who talks directly to Microsoft to ask these very questions is incorrect?
http://www.aidanfinn.com/?p=11837Windows Server 8 Hyper-V Replica, Veeam, Etc With Hosting Companies
If you replicate a VM from your licensed hosts to a hosting company of some sort using Hyper-V Replica (Windows Server
or one of the plethora of 3rd party alternatives, then you need to license the installation of Windows that is in each replica VM ā¦ even if it is powered off or locked in a replicating state. Donāt bother with any of the usual āitās not being usedā or āitās only being replicatedā arguments ā¦ it needs a license so thatās that.A benefit of Software Assurance is Cold Back-ups for Disaster Recovery. This means that if you license your hosts (and thus your guest OSs if correctly licensed with Enterprise/Datacenter editions) with SA, then you get a benefit of licensing for the cold backup copy. The alternative is to not buy SA for the host/guests and have to buy full licenses for the offline replicas. This benefit allows your primary site to go offline and to power up the replicas during a catastrophic event. You can do this without doing anything to activate the benefit or without communicating with Microsoft.
That's the misinformation I'm talking about. MS never says anything about that. And it is obviously not true as it means things like Veeam can't be used.
This is beyond question, incorrect information. That much we know for a fact. There is nothing from MS that suggests anything of the sort and if they did, it would be the instant end of Windows.
You are using industry standard terms to justify your misconception of what MS licensing is required. You need to go by what they say, not what you are.
You are saying that a VM replica and a backup are the same thing. Yes, technically they are and you are right. But this is not how MS is referring to it.
They are separating the two to mean different things here.
If you are replicating a VM to another Hyper-V host, then it must be licensed, whether you are using the built-in Hyper-V Replication, Veeam Replication, etc... If you back up a VM, that's not what they are referring to as replication.
Even Veeam separates the two... Veeam Backup AND replication... Not just one or the other.
-
YOu can do Veeam Backups, and then you can do Veeam Replication. They are different.
-
It's the method that matters, not the means.
-
@tim_g said in I can't even:
YOu can do Veeam Backups, and then you can do Veeam Replication. They are different.
But both are replication, and both are backups. They just label them differently on top. And from MS' point of view, both are cold and require no licensing.
