question about setting up a new domain controller
-
So, for example:
Windows Server User/Device CAL - this allows the user/device to connect to an unlimited number of company owned Windows Servers
SQL User CAL - this allows the user to connect to an unlimited number of company owned SQL servers
RDS User/Device CAL - this allows the user/device to connect to an unlimited number of company owned RDS servers.
-
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
Additionally, does MS have a document that explains ALL OF THIS so that I can read it and get my shit straight? I can't seem to find a guide that is all inclusive.
Sadly, No. Their documentation is intentionally oblique, very challenging to read and understand. Are there documents you can read - sure.
-
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dashrender said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
I did have to call and ask for help understanding the necessary licenses needed to make sure I was getting properly licensed.
So the proper places to get this advice is from IT folks, not sales people. This is no different than any other IT guidance. For something simple like this, you should always have an ITSP to help with this stuff, one quick email would have sorted it out in seconds. But you also could just ask in ML.
For this you need...
- One licensed server (the 8 two core licenses listed, assuming you have no more than sixteen cores on the box.)
- 80 Windows Server 2016 User CALs to be able to use the server
- 80 RDS User CALs to be able to use the terminal server feature (called RDS)
So do I only need one User CAL per user in my environment, for the highest version of Windows Server that I have?
That is correct. If you are adding Windows Server 2016, then with the first server that you add you need one User CAL for every user in the company (unless you can make a great case that someone could never use any Windows resource ever.) So if you have 100 employees, and one server, you need 100 CALs. Add three more servers, no more CALs. Add one hundred new servers next year, still no more CALs. Each user needs one CAL to cover what they use and no more. Remember, you are licensing the USER, not the server, and since the user is still just one person, they need just one license.
So, no more user CALs after the first server.. but what about server CALs? Do I need to add server CALs for each user for each server?
Servers don't have CALs. Servers need a Server license, users of servers need User CALs.
WHAT?? But you literally asked me in an earlier reply, "No Server CALs listed, you already have those for 2016?"
Right, we call them that. But those are the User CALs, User CALs for accessing the Windows Server infrastructure. Those were the ones we covered, then you asked about CALs just for the server after that.
Yes, I worded it poorly. But everyone calls them Server CALs. But they are the ones we had just covered.
So, to make sure I understand this now... I need to purchase USER CALs for the Server, only once. Then I need to purchase RDS User CALs for each RDS server? Or do I only need to purchase one set of RDS CALs also?
In the Microsoft world, if you buy a User/Device CAL, that CAL is assigned to the User/Device and allowed them unlimited access to whatever that is licensing them too.
Same with RDS User CALs?
yes.
-
@dashrender said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
So, for example:
Windows Server User/Device CAL - this allows the user/device to connect to an unlimited number of company owned Windows Servers
SQL User CAL - this allows the user to connect to an unlimited number of company owned SQL servers
RDS User/Device CAL - this allows the user/device to connect to an unlimited number of company owned RDS servers.
Perfect. That clarifies it for me. Thanks.
-
Then, in actuality, the CDW rep did not mess up, as I already have user CALs for Server 2016!!!!
-
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
Then, in actuality, the CDW rep did not mess up, as I already have user CALs for Server 2016!!!!
Did he know that? Did you tell him that?
-
@dashrender said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
This is very freaking frustrating. I know I need to sit down and re-read how server licensing works so I make sure I understand it. I should also find someone who can help me with this too..
Easiest to ask in ML. But @NTG has been doing this for a long time. As has @Bundy-Associates and others in the community. Licensing is quick and easy, not something you need more than a thread for. And sometimes that turns up good info about licensing that someone knows a trick to.
ok. Thanks Scott. I appreciate the help.
The only issue I have asking for help here, it seems, is that threads often times get deviated because people immediately start questioning why things are the way they are in an environment. I don't mind that so much, and I appreciate the valuable input, but sometimes it's really frustrating when it's every little thing that's being questioned. And I'm sure that if I list my licensing needs, people will start questioning why I need this or that when I should be doing it some other way.. That being said, i will still make a post at some point here..
Well, look at it this way... it was only by questioning every little thing that made me ask why your users weren't licensed to use Windows Server. What seems like "questioning every little thing" is how IT works. You can't do IT without that. If we didn't, we'd answer what is asked rather than what is meant or what is needed.
Sometimes you really do know exactly what you need and why and the extra questions are annoying. But when that is the case, generally answering the questions is quick and simple. If you don't already know the answers, then probably you aren't confident (or shouldn't be) as to what you are asking and all the clarifications and questioning are far more valuable than the answer to the initial questions.
Yeah, I understand. I really shouldn't complain... you guys really help me out a lot. I've learned so much that I've realized that I almost don't know anything at all..
Even when an individual question ends up being something that you already knew and had right, it's likely not a wasted conversation. Seeing the things that people are thinking, considering, or worried about can be educational even if it doesn't apply to you at the time. It also teaches you, in theory, ways to present information more completely from the beginning so as to make the process more straightforward.
In many cases, the reason that so many questions get asked is because there is either information missing or, and this is always tough to deal with, something seems likely to be a mistake based on nothing more than trends, and people worry that you will make it. This last one is tough because it feels like people are implying that you've missed something when nothing you've said shows that you have; but we all know that these things get missed so often, that we can't skip over mentioning it. And the logic is, if you realized how often that mistake is made, and you knew that you had it right, you'd mention why to speed things up.
Example:
I want to deploy RAID 5 on these old cheap 8TB SATA drives on a Drobo for our production server. What block size do I use?
If you post that alone, you will get endless explanations telling you to stop now and not to continue no matter what.
But, had you started with "I'm trying to induce failures to test how drives die with UREs, so I'm doing something dangerous on purpose" or "my boss is a moron and is forcing me to do this idiotic thing, but I can't talk him out of it" it would tell us both that you understood that this was crazy or unusual; and it would tell us that you had a reason that is nuts, but real, and needs to be followed regardless of the sanity or likeliness.
lmao.. my sides
Yeah, I've learned that it's all in how you ask the question, but kinda I suck at asking questions in an effective way..
That's why looking to see how we respond is a good learning system. But I wrote a guy long, long ago, too...
Here is someone just this morning, asking a question that they were way past the point of being lost on, but instead of backing up, included their "lostness" as part of their requirements.
https://mangolassi.it/topic/16088/step-back-when-asking-questions
Did you mean to post a link to Spiceworks?
Yes. And holy cow did that go from "just an example" to "clearly this guy was lost beyond belief." I posted that write up based on the OP alone, the thread just went nuts. The degree to which he was lost is SO much more profound than I had realized with that initial write up.
-
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
I did have to call and ask for help understanding the necessary licenses needed to make sure I was getting properly licensed.
So the proper places to get this advice is from IT folks, not sales people. This is no different than any other IT guidance. For something simple like this, you should always have an ITSP to help with this stuff, one quick email would have sorted it out in seconds. But you also could just ask in ML.
For this you need...
- One licensed server (the 8 two core licenses listed, assuming you have no more than sixteen cores on the box.)
- 80 Windows Server 2016 User CALs to be able to use the server
- 80 RDS User CALs to be able to use the terminal server feature (called RDS)
So do I only need one User CAL per user in my environment, for the highest version of Windows Server that I have?
That is correct. If you are adding Windows Server 2016, then with the first server that you add you need one User CAL for every user in the company (unless you can make a great case that someone could never use any Windows resource ever.) So if you have 100 employees, and one server, you need 100 CALs. Add three more servers, no more CALs. Add one hundred new servers next year, still no more CALs. Each user needs one CAL to cover what they use and no more. Remember, you are licensing the USER, not the server, and since the user is still just one person, they need just one license.
So, no more user CALs after the first server.. but what about server CALs? Do I need to add server CALs for each user for each server?
Servers don't have CALs. Servers need a Server license, users of servers need User CALs.
WHAT?? But you literally asked me in an earlier reply, "No Server CALs listed, you already have those for 2016?"
Right, we call them that. But those are the User CALs, User CALs for accessing the Windows Server infrastructure. Those were the ones we covered, then you asked about CALs just for the server after that.
Yes, I worded it poorly. But everyone calls them Server CALs. But they are the ones we had just covered.
So, to make sure I understand this now... I need to purchase USER CALs for the Server, only once. Then I need to purchase RDS User CALs for each RDS server? Or do I only need to purchase one set of RDS CALs also?
Nope, one set of RDS CALs, too. They cover multiple RDS servers. Remember, as with the Server CALs, it is the users, not the RDS, that you are specifically licensing against.
-
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dashrender said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
This is very freaking frustrating. I know I need to sit down and re-read how server licensing works so I make sure I understand it. I should also find someone who can help me with this too..
Easiest to ask in ML. But @NTG has been doing this for a long time. As has @Bundy-Associates and others in the community. Licensing is quick and easy, not something you need more than a thread for. And sometimes that turns up good info about licensing that someone knows a trick to.
ok. Thanks Scott. I appreciate the help.
The only issue I have asking for help here, it seems, is that threads often times get deviated because people immediately start questioning why things are the way they are in an environment. I don't mind that so much, and I appreciate the valuable input, but sometimes it's really frustrating when it's every little thing that's being questioned. And I'm sure that if I list my licensing needs, people will start questioning why I need this or that when I should be doing it some other way.. That being said, i will still make a post at some point here..
Well, look at it this way... it was only by questioning every little thing that made me ask why your users weren't licensed to use Windows Server. What seems like "questioning every little thing" is how IT works. You can't do IT without that. If we didn't, we'd answer what is asked rather than what is meant or what is needed.
Sometimes you really do know exactly what you need and why and the extra questions are annoying. But when that is the case, generally answering the questions is quick and simple. If you don't already know the answers, then probably you aren't confident (or shouldn't be) as to what you are asking and all the clarifications and questioning are far more valuable than the answer to the initial questions.
Yeah, I understand. I really shouldn't complain... you guys really help me out a lot. I've learned so much that I've realized that I almost don't know anything at all..
Even when an individual question ends up being something that you already knew and had right, it's likely not a wasted conversation. Seeing the things that people are thinking, considering, or worried about can be educational even if it doesn't apply to you at the time. It also teaches you, in theory, ways to present information more completely from the beginning so as to make the process more straightforward.
In many cases, the reason that so many questions get asked is because there is either information missing or, and this is always tough to deal with, something seems likely to be a mistake based on nothing more than trends, and people worry that you will make it. This last one is tough because it feels like people are implying that you've missed something when nothing you've said shows that you have; but we all know that these things get missed so often, that we can't skip over mentioning it. And the logic is, if you realized how often that mistake is made, and you knew that you had it right, you'd mention why to speed things up.
Example:
I want to deploy RAID 5 on these old cheap 8TB SATA drives on a Drobo for our production server. What block size do I use?
If you post that alone, you will get endless explanations telling you to stop now and not to continue no matter what.
But, had you started with "I'm trying to induce failures to test how drives die with UREs, so I'm doing something dangerous on purpose" or "my boss is a moron and is forcing me to do this idiotic thing, but I can't talk him out of it" it would tell us both that you understood that this was crazy or unusual; and it would tell us that you had a reason that is nuts, but real, and needs to be followed regardless of the sanity or likeliness.
lmao.. my sides
Yeah, I've learned that it's all in how you ask the question, but kinda I suck at asking questions in an effective way..
That's why looking to see how we respond is a good learning system. But I wrote a guy long, long ago, too...
Here is someone just this morning, asking a question that they were way past the point of being lost on, but instead of backing up, included their "lostness" as part of their requirements.
https://mangolassi.it/topic/16088/step-back-when-asking-questions
Did you mean to post a link to Spiceworks?
Yes. And holy cow did that go from "just an example" to "clearly this guy was lost beyond belief." I posted that write up based on the OP alone, the thread just went nuts. The degree to which he was lost is SO much more profound than I had realized with that initial write up.
I think you went overboard with it. He was using poor language skills for sure.. but he was explaining the tech correctly... He likely had Server 2016 with Hyper-V enabled..
He wasn't happy that you were trying to get him to give accurate information, well, because he didn't. -
@dashrender said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
Then, in actuality, the CDW rep did not mess up, as I already have user CALs for Server 2016!!!!
Did he know that? Did you tell him that?
This comes back to the - we, the IT community in this forum, look like we are not answering what you want, but in reality are finding out that maybe you didn't give us all of the information in the first place, so we went down a path that was incorrect, due to a lack of complete information.
-
@dashrender said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
Additionally, does MS have a document that explains ALL OF THIS so that I can read it and get my shit straight? I can't seem to find a guide that is all inclusive.
Sadly, No. Their documentation is intentionally oblique, very challenging to read and understand. Are there documents you can read - sure.
This is not true, not for licensing. It's really quite simple and straightforward. Maybe hard to find and not in one place, but the "licensing is hard" myth is a Spiceworks propaganda thing that isn't reflected in the real world. People say it over and over, so it must be true. People believe it and then make simple licensing really complex only because they are sure that it must be. In reality, once you learn the basics of their model, it nearly all works based on the "what makes the most sense" principle.
-
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
Then, in actuality, the CDW rep did not mess up, as I already have user CALs for Server 2016!!!!
That's why I asked that question
-
@dashrender said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dashrender said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
This is very freaking frustrating. I know I need to sit down and re-read how server licensing works so I make sure I understand it. I should also find someone who can help me with this too..
Easiest to ask in ML. But @NTG has been doing this for a long time. As has @Bundy-Associates and others in the community. Licensing is quick and easy, not something you need more than a thread for. And sometimes that turns up good info about licensing that someone knows a trick to.
ok. Thanks Scott. I appreciate the help.
The only issue I have asking for help here, it seems, is that threads often times get deviated because people immediately start questioning why things are the way they are in an environment. I don't mind that so much, and I appreciate the valuable input, but sometimes it's really frustrating when it's every little thing that's being questioned. And I'm sure that if I list my licensing needs, people will start questioning why I need this or that when I should be doing it some other way.. That being said, i will still make a post at some point here..
Well, look at it this way... it was only by questioning every little thing that made me ask why your users weren't licensed to use Windows Server. What seems like "questioning every little thing" is how IT works. You can't do IT without that. If we didn't, we'd answer what is asked rather than what is meant or what is needed.
Sometimes you really do know exactly what you need and why and the extra questions are annoying. But when that is the case, generally answering the questions is quick and simple. If you don't already know the answers, then probably you aren't confident (or shouldn't be) as to what you are asking and all the clarifications and questioning are far more valuable than the answer to the initial questions.
Yeah, I understand. I really shouldn't complain... you guys really help me out a lot. I've learned so much that I've realized that I almost don't know anything at all..
Even when an individual question ends up being something that you already knew and had right, it's likely not a wasted conversation. Seeing the things that people are thinking, considering, or worried about can be educational even if it doesn't apply to you at the time. It also teaches you, in theory, ways to present information more completely from the beginning so as to make the process more straightforward.
In many cases, the reason that so many questions get asked is because there is either information missing or, and this is always tough to deal with, something seems likely to be a mistake based on nothing more than trends, and people worry that you will make it. This last one is tough because it feels like people are implying that you've missed something when nothing you've said shows that you have; but we all know that these things get missed so often, that we can't skip over mentioning it. And the logic is, if you realized how often that mistake is made, and you knew that you had it right, you'd mention why to speed things up.
Example:
I want to deploy RAID 5 on these old cheap 8TB SATA drives on a Drobo for our production server. What block size do I use?
If you post that alone, you will get endless explanations telling you to stop now and not to continue no matter what.
But, had you started with "I'm trying to induce failures to test how drives die with UREs, so I'm doing something dangerous on purpose" or "my boss is a moron and is forcing me to do this idiotic thing, but I can't talk him out of it" it would tell us both that you understood that this was crazy or unusual; and it would tell us that you had a reason that is nuts, but real, and needs to be followed regardless of the sanity or likeliness.
lmao.. my sides
Yeah, I've learned that it's all in how you ask the question, but kinda I suck at asking questions in an effective way..
That's why looking to see how we respond is a good learning system. But I wrote a guy long, long ago, too...
Here is someone just this morning, asking a question that they were way past the point of being lost on, but instead of backing up, included their "lostness" as part of their requirements.
https://mangolassi.it/topic/16088/step-back-when-asking-questions
Did you mean to post a link to Spiceworks?
Yes. And holy cow did that go from "just an example" to "clearly this guy was lost beyond belief." I posted that write up based on the OP alone, the thread just went nuts. The degree to which he was lost is SO much more profound than I had realized with that initial write up.
I think you went overboard with it. He was using poor language skills for sure.. but he was explaining the tech correctly... He likely had Server 2016 with Hyper-V enabled..
He wasn't happy that you were trying to get him to give accurate information, well, because he didn't.No, he never once explained it correctly. It wasn't language that was wrong, his statements were patently false and impossible. Server 2016 with Hyper-V enabled is very different than anything he posted. And even when he ranted, his technical information was wrong for a fourth time. Four times, wrong all four times.
At no point could we ever know "what he knew" or "what he meant". Even now, we can't be totally sure as he has no words to describe what he imagines that he has. He literally doesn't even know what it is installed, that's the only thing that we've learned for sure. He's in so far over his head, that he can't figure out how to clarify it - because it isn't what he thinks that it is.
-
@scottalanmiller said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
@dave247 said in question about setting up a new domain controller:
Then, in actuality, the CDW rep did not mess up, as I already have user CALs for Server 2016!!!!
That's why I asked that question
I'm an idiot.
