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.
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.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
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.
To clarify for the eventual stupid that will come up.
The above works when Hyper-V Server or XS or KVM or VMWare is the base Hypervisor.
You cannot do that if you try to install Server 2016 Datacenter on the hardware. In that case, you need both licensed.
-
I just wrote a whole bunch of crap, then I found this and deleted it:
-
@Tim_G said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
I just wrote a whole bunch of crap, then I found this and deleted it:
Yeah - JB had a phone call with MS or their agent and basically shut them down because they were telling him that he needed to license the passive failover server for the number of licenses that could be running there. Your post says differently
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Tim_G said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
I just wrote a whole bunch of crap, then I found this and deleted it:
Yeah - JB had a phone call with MS or their agent and basically shut them down because they were telling him that he needed to license the passive failover server for the number of licenses that could be running there. Your post says differently
Email, but yeah.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Tim_G said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
I just wrote a whole bunch of crap, then I found this and deleted it:
Yeah - JB had a phone call with MS or their agent and basically shut them down because they were telling him that he needed to license the passive failover server for the number of licenses that could be running there. Your post says differently
But what I'm thinking, is that because of this:
...you could just move the OSE DC license (along with all 50 VMs) to the other Node in the cluster. That way the passive failover server would be properly licensed.
-
@Tim_G said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Dashrender said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
@Tim_G said in Windows Server 2016 Licences for cluster:
I just wrote a whole bunch of crap, then I found this and deleted it:
Yeah - JB had a phone call with MS or their agent and basically shut them down because they were telling him that he needed to license the passive failover server for the number of licenses that could be running there. Your post says differently
But what I'm thinking, is that because of this:
...you could just move the OSE DC license (along with all 50 VMs) to the other Node in the cluster. That way the passive failover server would be properly licensed.
Yes. As long as everything goes with it, you can do that. Once ever 90 days without SA, or whenever you want with SA.
-
This turned into an awesome discussion. I need to bookmark this one, some dynamite licensing info here.
-
Guys you are wrong in your interpretation. The Server pool rights you are referring to are a general guideline, each Server Application is different. To understand the rights you have with a specific application, in this case Windows Server, you need to look at the Product Terms specific to Windows Server starting on page 45.
No license mobility!
Therefore you cannot move vm's more than once per 90 days just by having SA, you need to be properly licensed meaning you have a Windows datacenter license on each host, or sufficient standard licenses to cover the maximum number of vms on EVERY host in the cluster at once.
In this example, you need either 2 datacenter licenses (which would be overkill for such a small number of vms) or 2 standard licenses on EACH host. (4 licenses total or the equivalent in core licenses)Look at the licensing for SQL Server, its different, it clearly spells out that SQL with Software insurance includes License Mobility. Windows Server does not.
-
@Scott_AssetLabs well that's crap
But makes more sense.
-
That was basically where I was 2 years ago - but clearly I didn't find the correct docs for my original thinking.
