CALs

Dagged

Hi all,

Can you explain me what is difference between per server and per client Cals please. I don't get it...

Thanks

skrpune

just went through this in my TestOut stuff, so here goes my very simple understanding:
- per server is based on the number of connections to the server. If you have more than one server, you need per server licenses for each server...not an issue if people need to just access one server, but if there are multiple servers it becomes less of a good idea and more of a pain in the arse and requires more licenses.
- per client is managed by the individual clients and can allow for access to multiple servers with one license per client.

If you have one server and 15 users/15 computers, then it might be best/simplest to use Per Server licensing; you are allowed 15 simultaneous connections to the server.

But let's say you have three servers and 15 users. In order for all users to access all servers, you'd have to have 15 per server licenses for each server...that's 45 licenses. Instead, you can use per user licensing and just get 15 user licenses and the users will be able to access any/all servers.

Dagged

So If you have per server licence I stillhave to manage how many users will be conected ? So to get you right. I have 15 users and 15 per client/user Cals and 3 servers. All 15 can access all 3 servers? But If I would buy per server than each of server has to hold 15 cals?

skrpune

I believe so, yes. If those 15 users need to access all three servers and if you use Per Server licensing, you'd have to have 15 licenses for each Server. Per Server licenses allow a certain number of connections per server.

Dagged

yes but isn't like you have to have 3 cals for server and 15 for users ? If useing per client

dynamik

CAL = Client Access License. You don't need CALs for servers. You might if you're doing something odd like using a server machine as a workstation or something. I'm not sure how they'd expect you to license that. You're not going to be questioned on anything like that, and you probably won't encounter that out in the field.

Here's another scenario. Suppose you have fifteen employees, ten client computers, and one server. It would make the most sense to use per server in this situation because you'd only need ten. If you went per user, you'd need fifteen. However, if you add a second server, you'd have to add ten to that server if you were using per server. You'd end up with twenty in that scenario as opposed to fifteen if you had gone with per user.

Dagged

thank you mates