Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
Also, the above linked Word Document doesn't discuss 2016 at all, so it's possible there is a new document with new rules.
It is completely applicable to Server 2016.
-
@Tim_G said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
Also, the above linked Word Document doesn't discuss 2016 at all, so it's possible there is a new document with new rules.
It is completely applicable to Server 2016.
Yeah, WTF @Dashrender that is all about 2016.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
You just stated all of the old understandings. Nothing new.
Scott was implying above that there was a new thing with SA (or someone was) that SA alone now allowed you to move your server licenses between servers at will. But as you already pointed out, that's not the case, you can only move it once every 90 days.
Ummm WTF? You are wrong. SA has always given you mobility. No one has said anything else.
-
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
You just stated all of the old understandings. Nothing new.
Scott was implying above that there was a new thing with SA (or someone was) that SA alone now allowed you to move your server licenses between servers at will. But as you already pointed out, that's not the case, you can only move it once every 90 days.
Ummm WTF? You are wrong. SA has always given you mobility. No one has said anything else.
yeah 90 day mobility, not daily or better.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
With Software Assurance license mobility, I believe that you can deploy two Windows 2016 Standard Packs, add on SA and then have the right to move the workloads between the two machines.
@JaredBusch this comment is what I'm talking about - If @scottalanmiller is talking about the fact that you can move workloads once every 90 days - OK, that's true, but reading his post, why would you think you'd be limited in this way? Why wouldn't you read that to mean that you can move it anytime you want.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
You just stated all of the old understandings. Nothing new.
Scott was implying above that there was a new thing with SA (or someone was) that SA alone now allowed you to move your server licenses between servers at will. But as you already pointed out, that's not the case, you can only move it once every 90 days.
Ummm WTF? You are wrong. SA has always given you mobility. No one has said anything else.
yeah 90 day mobility, not daily or better.
No, with SA you can move it whenever you want. You just have to ensure that both virtual machines associated with that SA license are always on the same host. That is not new.
You can move a non-SA license once every 90 days. This is not new.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
With Software Assurance license mobility, I believe that you can deploy two Windows 2016 Standard Packs, add on SA and then have the right to move the workloads between the two machines.
@JaredBusch this comment is what I'm talking about - If @scottalanmiller is talking about the fact that you can move workloads once every 90 days - OK, that's true, but reading his post, why would you think you'd be limited in this way? Why wouldn't you read that to mean that you can move it anytime you want.
There is no 90 day limit with SA.
-
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
You just stated all of the old understandings. Nothing new.
Scott was implying above that there was a new thing with SA (or someone was) that SA alone now allowed you to move your server licenses between servers at will. But as you already pointed out, that's not the case, you can only move it once every 90 days.
Ummm WTF? You are wrong. SA has always given you mobility. No one has said anything else.
yeah 90 day mobility, not daily or better.
No, with SA you can move it whenever you want. You just have to ensure that both virtual machines associated with that SA license are always on the same host. That is not new.
You can move a non-SA license once every 90 days. This is not new.
So me where SA allows you to move it as often as you want, please - I'd like to see the MS black and white on that.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
You just stated all of the old understandings. Nothing new.
Scott was implying above that there was a new thing with SA (or someone was) that SA alone now allowed you to move your server licenses between servers at will. But as you already pointed out, that's not the case, you can only move it once every 90 days.
Ummm WTF? You are wrong. SA has always given you mobility. No one has said anything else.
yeah 90 day mobility, not daily or better.
No, with SA you can move it whenever you want. You just have to ensure that both virtual machines associated with that SA license are always on the same host. That is not new.
You can move a non-SA license once every 90 days. This is not new.
So me where SA allows you to move it as often as you want, please - I'd like to see the MS black and white on that.
That pages I noted above.
-
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
You just stated all of the old understandings. Nothing new.
Scott was implying above that there was a new thing with SA (or someone was) that SA alone now allowed you to move your server licenses between servers at will. But as you already pointed out, that's not the case, you can only move it once every 90 days.
Ummm WTF? You are wrong. SA has always given you mobility. No one has said anything else.
yeah 90 day mobility, not daily or better.
No, with SA you can move it whenever you want. You just have to ensure that both virtual machines associated with that SA license are always on the same host. That is not new.
You can move a non-SA license once every 90 days. This is not new.
So me where SA allows you to move it as often as you want, please - I'd like to see the MS black and white on that.
That pages I noted above.
They don't say that.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@JaredBusch said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
You just stated all of the old understandings. Nothing new.
Scott was implying above that there was a new thing with SA (or someone was) that SA alone now allowed you to move your server licenses between servers at will. But as you already pointed out, that's not the case, you can only move it once every 90 days.
Ummm WTF? You are wrong. SA has always given you mobility. No one has said anything else.
yeah 90 day mobility, not daily or better.
No, with SA you can move it whenever you want. You just have to ensure that both virtual machines associated with that SA license are always on the same host. That is not new.
You can move a non-SA license once every 90 days. This is not new.
So me where SA allows you to move it as often as you want, please - I'd like to see the MS black and white on that.
That pages I noted above.
They don't say that.
Right on page 82 as i said.
-
You cannot move it to another farm (ie azure) and back in less than 90 days unless it also falls under the DR rules.
-
OK so License mobility is something included in SA, in something called the Server Pool (not entirely sure what that is - yet) list on the top of page 75
https://i.imgur.com/LgB3BWe.pngthe portion under License Mobility reads
https://i.imgur.com/CO1aLN4.pngSo perhaps the part JB is talking about is
https://i.imgur.com/BhelJFk.pngWhat constitutes a Server Farm? Let's find out.
Under definitions we find.
https://i.imgur.com/htTf01P.pngOK then - holy shit! Where has this information been this whole time? This kills many SMBs need to have DC licensing for VM failover nodes. Right? SA is often way less expensive than DC licenses.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
OK then - holy shit! Where has this information been this whole time? This kills many SMBs need to have DC licensing for VM failover nodes. Right? SA is often way less expensive than DC licenses.
Posted again for how valuable this information actually is!
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
OK then - holy shit! Where has this information been this whole time? This kills many SMBs need to have DC licensing for VM failover nodes. Right? SA is often way less expensive than DC licenses.
Well, only if the other node is properly licensed. It says you are free to move it from licensed server to licensed server as often as you like. Not from licensed node (server) to unlicensed node (server).
Example, if Node1 in a cluster has Datacenter, and Node2 has Standard, already with 2 VMs on NOde2... then a VM cannot fail over from node1 to node2 because it's not licensed... "Licensed Server".
Or did I misunderstand you?
-
@Tim_G said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
OK then - holy shit! Where has this information been this whole time? This kills many SMBs need to have DC licensing for VM failover nodes. Right? SA is often way less expensive than DC licenses.
Well, only if the other node is properly licensed. It says you are free to move it from licensed server to licensed server as often as you like. Not from licensed node (server) to unlicensed node (server).
Example, if Node1 in a cluster has Datacenter, and Node2 has Standard, already with 2 VMs on NOde2... then a VM cannot fail over from node1 to node2 because it's not licensed... "Licensed Server".
Or did I misunderstand you?
As JB did mention above, you have to move all associated VMs with the license you are moving, but you can move the (and it's associated VMs) as frequently as you want.
So using your example, assuming all things have SA, you can move your Datacenter license to Node2, as long as you move all VMs associated with the DC license to the alternative node.
-
Here's an easier situation.
You have two servers in a failover cluster, you purchase one DC license. You run 100% of your VMs from just one of the two nodes in your cluster. You can move all those VMs to the other host as often as you like under this SA mobility allowance.
So, it's patch Tuesday, you patch the unused server, reboot it, done
You then migrate all VMs to the patched server, transfering the license to that one server
now you patch the unused server, reboot it, done
Now you can move all the VMs backIf you didn't have SA, you could not legally do the above process (specifically that last step) unless you license both servers for enough Windows licenses to cover your needs.
-
This is really F'n huge! How have there not been countless discussions on this in the past?
-
Man this stuff can be confusing in that it can be taken so many different ways depending on your perspective going into it... but I think you are right and it is huge.
But now the best thing to do is to try to disprove it using the same word doc... If you can't, then I would say what you pointed out stands.
-
@Tim_G said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
Man this stuff can be confusing in that it can be taken so many different ways depending on your perspective going into it... but I think you are right and it is huge.
But now the best thing to do is to try to disprove it using the same word doc... If you can't, then I would say what you pointed out stands.
Well I have to give all props to Scott's thinking he heard something - then JB's claim that Scott's hearing was right.
I will admit I didn't buy it because the 90 day thing was just so engrained I couldn't them not doing almost everything in their power to force you to buy tons of licensing.
