Small Business server 2003 cal question

[bluegreenturtle]

So I bought a server for a small office that has sbs2003 on it.

The office wants to use all of the server's features, including exchange.

There are 9 full time employees plus sometimes an intern floats through, so I thought, great, and bought an additional 5 cals, for a total of 10 cals.

What I want to know - do you HAVE to have additional cals for other computers in the office that won't be participating in the exchange functions.

Like, there are 2 other file servers, 1 print server, an ftp server, and 2 of the employees have additional workstations that do graphics rendering. Can these machines participate in the domain that the SBS2003 will be DC'ing without cals, or is that not even the purpose of the cals anyway?? (I'm NOT asking about the legalities of it, I'm asking if it's possible.)

 

[Agamar]

It depends on what kind of cals you bought. You can go 2 ways. Per device (computer), or per user. If you have more comps that users, you use per user. If you have more users, you use per user.

 

[bluegreenturtle]

no, I understand that.

I'm asking - if you try to join a server (for example) to a sbs controlled domain, and you have already used up the installed cals, what does it do?

 

[Agamar]

Well, if you are trying to join a server to the domain, and you have been using Per User cals, then you will be able to join to the domain no problem. I am not sure what MS has as far as a cal for a server, but I believe that any device added to the domain counts against the device cals.

Anyway, whenever you run out of licenses you will get a warning in the event log. Once you run out, you will start getting users reporting problems logging in, getting email, etc. The user may even appear to log in to the domain, but not get full access (mapped drives don't map, Outlook will have errors). I have only seen this with Per User cal's, however.

 

[bluegreenturtle]

Can you just turn off the licensing service?

It seems wrong that I should have to pay for extra cals just because, for example, I am running a computer on the network that is a print server and administers all the printers, as opposed to just having printers with their own ip addresses. It seems like that computer shouldn't need a cal. Or that instead of one big file server I have two middle sized ones - seems like that shouldn't take up an extra cal.

I understand what you're saying though - I could just log in all the servers with the same user cal, thus using up 1 cal for all the servers, right? But I still don't want to use up that cal because I have basically 10 users that need to actually "use" the full services of the sbs server.

 

[mikecel79]

Originally posted by: bluegreenturtle
Can you just turn off the licensing service?

Sure but it doesn't make what your doing legal.

It seems wrong that I should have to pay for extra cals just because, for example, I am running a computer on the network that is a print server and administers all the printers, as opposed to just having printers with their own ip addresses. It seems like that computer shouldn't need a cal.

It authenticates with the domain, therefore it needs a CAL. It is participating in the domain so legally it needs one.

Or that instead of one big file server I have two middle sized ones - seems like that shouldn't take up an extra cal.

Again you now have two boxes participating in the domain and accessing domain resources (authentication), therefore you need a CAL for them.

It doesn't matter what you think. If you use the software you agree to the license. You agreed to it when you installed the software. If you don't want to abide by the agreement, format the machine and install something else with a less strict license.

I understand what you're saying though - I could just log in all the servers with the same user cal, thus using up 1 cal for all the servers, right? But I still don't want to use up that cal because I have basically 10 users that need to actually "use" the full services of the sbs server.

What is the cost of a 5 pack of CALs? $500 USD? We are not talking about breaking the bank here.
I know you didn't want to be lectured on the legalities of this but you know what, I don't care. I hate when people come in here and blatantly point out they want to pirate software.

 

[bluegreenturtle]

Hey, don't be a prick and get off your high horse. I didn't say anything about pirating software. If I want to pirate the operating system, I know how to do so without asking anybody any questions. In fact I even have the Action Pack version of the thing sitting right here and could have installed that, but instead just spend $1k getting a retail version, trying to do the right thing. I had a specific inquiry and was looking for an answer. Your value added comments are neither intelligent nor needed.

 

[mikecel79]

Like, there are 2 other file servers, 1 print server, an ftp server, and 2 of the employees have additional workstations that do graphics rendering. Can these machines participate in the domain that the SBS2003 will be DC'ing without cals, or is that not even the purpose of the cals anyway?? (I'm NOT asking about the legalities of it, I'm asking if it's possible.)

Sounds to me like your pirating. Your trying to use more CALs than you own, so your pirating CALs. You know it's not legal and yet you go ahead and ask anyways.

n fact I even have the Action Pack version of the thing sitting right here and could have installed that, but instead just spend $1k getting a retail version, trying to do the right thing.

If you have the Action Pack (not doubting you do) there was no reason to buy retail software. As stated on the Action Pack site:

"The software included with the subscription can be used for internal business use, testing, evaluation, demonstration, training, and educational purposes only. For example, you can use the Action Pack software to host your company's intranet but it cannot be used to host a commercial website. This is considered a production environment that is outside the scope of the software's intended purpose."

You could have used your Action Pack for internal business and had nothing to worry about....

 

[bluegreenturtle]

Sometimes one asks a question that is only part of the picture - that has a different purpose than the one that the reader forces onto it (because of some internal state of mind or slant). I specified that I didn't want a legal opinion because in this case it has no bearing on the part of the question that I want answered, yet people always seem to feel that it needs to be brought into the discussion. I wanted to know about the particular behaviour of SBS2003, which is different in terms of the licensing service than all other MS os's.


The action pack internal use license only applies if your company is a developer for MS software or is IT consulting, etc. You can't just use it for your company if your company isn't a software developer or the like.

The software is not for regular business use. The extra cals that they include for the server OS's however, are strangely, retail.