3 ms·

Remote Desktop on Azure is a bit of a licensing nightmare. See this [1] old blog post: > Effective January 1, 2014, Volume Licensing customers who have active

Remote Desktop on Azure is a bit of a licensing nightmare. See this [1] old blog post: > Effective January 1, 2014, Volume Licensing customers who have active Software Assurance on their RDS User CALs are entitled to RDS CAL Extended Rights, which allow use of their RDS User CAL with Software Assurance against a Windows Server running on Windows Azure Licensing costs for Remote Desktop Services (not Azure RemoteApp) is not built-in to the virtual machine pricing. [1] https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/luispanzano/2013/07/15/remote-desktop-services-are-now-allowed-on-windows-azure/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/luispanzano/2013/07/15/remo...

rjbwork 11y ago
So... does that mean you can't RDP into your machine to do administrative stuff? EDIT: Oh i see, ONLY administrative stuff if you need more than 2 users.
- taspeotis 11y ago
  The admin. connections are free of licensing restrictions, anything beyond that is a PITA (on Azure).
drglitch 11y ago
Exactly right - you only get 2 admin RDP licenses with Azure Windows VM. More users requires running RD License Host and using either user or device RDS CALs (not to be confused with Server access CALs which ARE included with Azure cost). Further, extended rights enablement seems (to still) requires an active SA contract. To make matters worse (and this is unclear) you can only do RDS User CALs in Active Directory mode, but must use Device RDS CALs in workgroup mode, making an install scenario where a couple of users just want to share a desktop app (quickbooks, for example) a freaking nightmare. In essence, it seems that RDS licensing is currently targeted only at hybrid deployments (e.g. you're taking your RDS from on-premises to hybrid via SA/Extended Rights). As of this summer, it should be possible to also use RDS via SA/ExRights on AWS, which, ironically, costs materially less than Azure for a Windows Server license on top of decent hardware+ssds. Oh, and because its microsoft, every single possible combo of user/device/rds/sa/whatever licenses carries its own SKU. After this "exercise" I know far more than i ever wanted to about Microsoft licensing :(

rjbwork 11y ago

So... does that mean you can't RDP into your machine to do administrative stuff? EDIT: Oh i see, ONLY administrative stuff if you need more than 2 users.

taspeotis 11y ago
The admin. connections are free of licensing restrictions, anything beyond that is a PITA (on Azure).

drglitch 11y ago

Exactly right - you only get 2 admin RDP licenses with Azure Windows VM. More users requires running RD License Host and using either user or device RDS CALs (not to be confused with Server access CALs which ARE included with Azure cost). Further, extended rights enablement seems (to still) requires an active SA contract. To make matters worse (and this is unclear) you can only do RDS User CALs in Active Directory mode, but must use Device RDS CALs in workgroup mode, making an install scenario where a couple of users just want to share a desktop app (quickbooks, for example) a freaking nightmare. In essence, it seems that RDS licensing is currently targeted only at hybrid deployments (e.g. you're taking your RDS from on-premises to hybrid via SA/Extended Rights). As of this summer, it should be possible to also use RDS via SA/ExRights on AWS, which, ironically, costs materially less than Azure for a Windows Server license on top of decent hardware+ssds. Oh, and because its microsoft, every single possible combo of user/device/rds/sa/whatever licenses carries its own SKU. After this "exercise" I know far more than i ever wanted to about Microsoft licensing :(