3 ms·
Well, I spoke to MS licensing person from Warsaw 3 months ago and she was sure about the need for an external connector license if you don't want to pay CALs (c
by polskibus 11y ago
Well, I spoke to MS licensing person from Warsaw 3 months ago and she was sure about the need for an external connector license if you don't want to pay CALs (costs around 100 CALs if I remember correctly). What is your source of information if I may ask? Or maybe you can point me towards a publicly available document?
- wrs 11y agoYou do need an external connector license for the servers that aren't running "web workloads" (serving pages), e.g., a database or mid-tier application server. See question 5 at http://blogs.technet.com/b/volume-licensing/archive/2014/03/10/licensing-how-to-when-do-i-need-a-client-access-license-cal.aspx http://blogs.technet.com/b/volume-licensing/archive/2014/03/... That blog post is also a great demonstration of the hilariously complicated MS licensing regime. Hilarious if you don't have to deal with it, that is.
- polskibus 11y agoThanks a lot for the link! It seems that if I have a web app and database on the same server then user<->web app does not require CAL even if database is involved in handling that web app work load! That's good news for my use case. It really shows how twisted MS licensing is if MS licensing staff does not understand MS licensing ) I am not sure however, whether this changes if authentication is involved - is it still a publicly available web solution or not? I really hope ASP.NET will become rock solid soon on Linux so one can avoid MS licensing twists altogether,